Group 1 - The development of offshore finance in free trade zones can promote institutional opening in the financial sector and optimize other economic and trade rules, making it an effective way to drive institutional opening [1][12] - Since the establishment of the China (Shanghai) Free Trade Zone in 2013, various local governments have actively planned and attempted breakthroughs in offshore finance, indicating a consensus on its development [1][2] - The relationship between free trade zones and offshore finance is complex, with free trade zones being a physical concept and offshore finance representing an abstract trading behavior, necessitating further analysis of their interaction [1][10] Group 2 - The innovation logic of free trade zones aims to construct a high-level institutional opening, testing policy adjustments within the zones and promoting successful practices nationwide [2] - Various innovative policies, such as the negative list management system, have improved the business environment in free trade zones, attracting foreign direct investment [3] - Despite the introduction of innovative policies, challenges remain, particularly in the financial sector, where regulatory capabilities need to evolve to manage risks associated with capital flow [4][6] Group 3 - The focus of reforms in free trade zones has shifted towards enhancing trade facilitation, but there is a need for qualitative breakthroughs as the marginal benefits of quantitative reforms diminish [5] - The paradoxical relationship between capital account opening and financial system development highlights the need for a balanced approach to financial liberalization [8] - Developing domestic offshore finance could be a key strategy to address the paradox of capital account opening and financial system development, allowing for enhanced regulatory capabilities without full capital account liberalization [9][11]