Core Insights - The article analyzes the core challenges of offshore trade in China and proposes an institutional innovation plan centered on "law-tax-regulation-opening" collaboration [1][5] - Offshore trade in China is experiencing rapid growth, yet service trade accounts for less than 10% of it, highlighting a significant gap compared to the global average of over 25% [1][2] - The article emphasizes the need for a paradigm shift in recognizing service trade as the driving force behind offshore trade, rather than merely a support function [2][5] Challenges in Offshore Trade - The intangible nature of service trade complicates rights confirmation, leading banks to hesitate in providing financing support, which restricts business expansion [3][5] - The integration of information flow, capital flow, and service results in service trade increases regulatory difficulties, often resulting in either delayed risk identification or excessive compliance costs for enterprises [3][5] - High dependency on rules and significant international discrepancies in regulations create compliance challenges for Chinese service enterprises operating abroad, with compliance costs consuming 8% to 12% of service revenue [3][4] Factors Limiting Development - A long-standing bias towards "heavy goods, light services" has led to a relative disadvantage for service trade in resource allocation and policy support [4][5] - Fragmented statistical standards for service trade hinder precise decision-making and strategy formulation [4][5] - Domestic institutions lack sufficient international service capabilities, with cross-border financial services coverage only one-third of that in Singapore [4][5] Global Best Practices - Successful offshore trade centers globally prioritize service trade in their institutional frameworks, with Singapore, Hong Kong, and New York serving as key examples [6][7] - Singapore's model includes legal guarantees, tax incentives, and regulatory innovation, facilitating efficient offshore service trade [6] - Hong Kong leverages its common law system and tax exemptions to reduce service trade costs, while New York optimizes service trade processes through account isolation and regulatory collaboration [7] Proposed Solutions - The article outlines a seven-dimensional approach to enhance service trade awareness and capabilities, including legal reforms, tax optimization, and regulatory collaboration [8][9] - Legal reforms aim to establish a comprehensive protection system for digital rights in service trade, addressing the challenges posed by intangible assets [9] - Tax incentives are proposed to support offshore financial and cross-border digital service enterprises, with long-term stable tax rates [10][11] - Simplifying foreign exchange management and enhancing financial support for service trade are also critical components of the proposed solutions [11][12] - Establishing a unified regulatory platform and reducing negative lists for service trade can streamline processes and enhance efficiency [12][13]