The Financial Report

By Janet Tavakoli

Home » The Financial Report » China’s Challenge to US Dollar: From 2009 Warning to 2025

China’s Challenge to US Dollar: From 2009 Warning to 2025

Posted June 26, 2025
By Janet Tavakoli

Updated in June 2025 from October 6, 2009 commentary by Janet Tavakoli

Executive Summary

Sixteen years after my initial commentary warning of China’s challenge to the dollar’s dominance, the trajectory I identified has not only continued but accelerated dramatically. What began as isolated Chinese bank defaults on derivatives contracts has evolved into a comprehensive, multi-faceted campaign to establish alternative financial infrastructure and reduce global dependence on the U.S. dollar.

The Evolution of China’s Financial Strategy

Currency Basket Development

China has systematically reduced the U.S. dollar’s weighting in its CFETS currency basket over recent years, from 19.83% to 18.903% by 2025, while also cutting euro and yen weightings. This gradual but persistent de-dollarization of China’s reference basket reflects a deliberate strategy to diminish the dollar’s role in Chinese monetary policy.

Foreign Exchange Reserves: Unprecedented Scale

As of May 2025, China’s foreign exchange reserves totaled $3.285 trillion, maintaining the world’s largest holdings. This represents a 43% increase from the $2.3 trillion I noted in 2009, demonstrating China’s continued accumulation of financial leverage. The composition remains approximately two-thirds U.S. dollars and one-fifth euros, giving China enormous influence over global currency markets.

The Oil Trading Revolution

The most significant development has been in global oil markets. By 2023, one-fifth of global oil trade was settled in non-U.S. dollar currencies, a dramatic shift from the near-universal dollar dominance that existed in 2009. China completed its first cross-border payment for oil in digital yuan and state-owned oil companies have made several purchases in Chinese currency rather than dollars.

However, the petroyuan remains constrained by practical challenges. Middle Eastern officials remain lukewarm about pricing oil in yuan, citing concerns about currency convertibility and liquidity compared to the dollar. Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states continue to peg their currencies to the dollar, requiring constant dollar inflows to support these arrangements.

China’s Derivatives Market Maturation

From Defaults to Dominance

The Chinese banks’ 2008 derivatives defaults I highlighted have given way to sophisticated market development. China’s renminbi-denominated interest rate derivatives market expanded by 47.2% to $4.5 trillion in 2024, while Hong Kong’s RMB derivatives market grew to $12.0 trillion. The May 2023 launch of Swap Connect, allowing international investors access to China’s $3 trillion annual turnover derivatives market, represents a complete reversal from the confrontational defaults of 2008-2009.

Regulatory Tightening

China’s securities regulator announced increased scrutiny of derivatives businesses in February 2024, including punishment of hedge funds for excessive high-frequency trading. This reflects Beijing’s determination to maintain control over its financial markets while opening them to international participation.

The BRICS Alternative

Emerging Infrastructure

The most ambitious challenge to dollar dominance comes through the BRICS alliance, now expanded to ten members. At the 2024 BRICS Summit in Kazan, Russia, discussions continued about creating a potentially gold-backed currency called the “Unit” as an alternative to the U.S. dollar. A BRICS blockchain-based payment system is in development, known as the BRICS Bridge platform, which would serve as an alternative to the SWIFT system.

Russian President Putin displayed what appeared to be a prototype BRICS banknote, though he backed away from aggressive de-dollarization rhetoric, stating BRICS aims to deter “weaponization” of the dollar rather than abandoning it entirely.

Practical Challenges

Analysts note that BRICS nations are not a homogenous group with common objectives, and expanding membership to include countries like Ethiopia and Egypt—currently reliant on IMF financing—adds complexity and reduces the probability of a successful currency arrangement.

Geopolitical and Economic Context

Sanctions as Catalyst

Western sanctions on Russia following the Ukraine conflict have accelerated de-dollarization efforts. Chinese banks report surge in cross-border yuan business, with institutions like Harbin Bank seeing nine-fold growth in cross-border yuan transactions due to increased Russia-China trade. Iran and Russia have agreed to completely stop using the U.S. dollar in bilateral trade.

Trade Volume Realities

Despite these developments, practical constraints remain significant. China’s crude oil imports actually fell 1.9% in 2024, the first annual decline in two decades outside of COVID-19, reflecting economic challenges and the transition to electric vehicles reducing fuel demand.

Financial Market Implications

Default Risks and Stability

Corporate defaults in Greater China fell to two in 2023 from a record high of 14 in 2022, both from the real estate sector. However, S&P warns China may face a new wave of bond defaults, with real estate having led the latest wave between 2020-2024.

Credit Market Development

The derivatives defaults I warned about in 2009 now appear as growing pains in China’s financial market development. Current default risk projections show Chinese corporates could see material deterioration from a low base in 2025, but this reflects normal market functioning rather than the systemic challenges of 2008-2009.

The Great China Debate: Lessons from Rogers vs. Chanos (2012-2025)

The Legendary Dueling Jims

In 2012, as China’s challenges became more apparent, the investment world was captivated by the debate between two legendary investors: Jim Rogers (the bull) and Jim Chanos (the bear). Their opposing views represented one of the most consequential investment debates of the decade and provide valuable context for understanding China’s actual trajectory.

Rogers’ Bull Case: The commodities legend argued that China was experiencing localized price bubbles in urban, coastal real estate rather than a systemic credit bubble. He emphasized lower leverage in the Chinese system (30-50% down payments, often 100% cash), diversified economic growth beyond real estate, and explosive commodity demand. Rogers positioned himself in commodities, agricultural land, and pollution-solution companies while moving his family to Singapore to ensure his daughters learned Mandarin.

Chanos’ Bear Case: The renowned short-seller warned of fundamental structural problems: unsustainable debt levels with loans at $6,500 per capita against GDP per capita of $4,400, massive property overinvestment (13% of GDP vs. 3% in 1999), hidden local government debt approximating one-third of GDP, and 35-50% of bank loans tied to property markets. Chanos went short construction materials and property developers while famously declaring himself “long corruption, short property.”

How the Debate Resolved (2012-2025)

Rogers was largely validated:

China avoided systemic collapse through managed government intervention.
Commodity demand drove a historic supercycle from 2012-2021.
The Belt and Road Initiative materialized his infrastructure vision.
Yuan internationalization accelerated, becoming the fourth most popular settlement currency by 2023.
China became the world’s largest market for pollution solutions and renewable energy.

Chanos was partially correct:

Real estate corrections occurred in multiple cycles (2011-2012, 2021-2023) with 20-30% price declines.
Local government debt problems surfaced repeatedly, requiring central intervention.
Banking system stress increased, particularly in property sectors.
Construction demand peaked and declined, affecting commodities.

Neither anticipated the actual outcome: China as a managed-growth economy that successfully challenged dollar hegemony while maintaining domestic stability through unprecedented government intervention.

Key Lessons for Current Analysis

The Rogers-Chanos debate revealed critical insights:

Time Horizon Matters: Rogers’ longer-term perspective proved more accurate than immediate crash scenarios.
Government Intervention Capacity: Both underestimated Beijing’s ability to manage financial stress through direct intervention.
Complexity of Transition: China’s evolution was more nuanced than either bull or bear scenarios suggested.
Geopolitical Dimensions: Neither adequately anticipated how economic development would translate into systematic challenges to Western financial hegemony.

Assessment and Outlook

Progress Toward Original Predictions

The trajectory I identified in 2009 has largely materialized, though more gradually than the “within 10 years” timeline suggested by the original Robert Fisk reporting. The Rogers-Chanos debate demonstrated that while the timeline was extended, the fundamental direction proved correct. China has successfully:

Built alternative financial infrastructure (CIPS, Swap Connect, BRICS Bridge).
Increased non-dollar oil trading from near-zero to 20% of global volume.
Expanded its derivatives markets to rival international standards.
Accumulated unprecedented foreign exchange reserves ($3.285 trillion).
Managed economic transitions better than either bulls or bears anticipated.

Remaining Constraints

However, fundamental challenges persist:

Currency Convertibility: The yuan remains subject to capital controls, limiting its appeal as a reserve currency
Market Liquidity: Dollar markets remain far more liquid and developed
Political Divisions: BRICS expansion has diluted cohesion and effectiveness
Economic Fundamentals: China’s slowing growth and property sector challenges constrain its financial influence

Strategic Implications

China’s approach has evolved from the confrontational defaults of 2008-2009 to a more sophisticated strategy of building parallel financial infrastructure while maintaining engagement with existing systems. The Rogers-Chanos debate illustrates that China’s path combined elements neither side fully anticipated: managed financial risks, systematic geopolitical competition, and technological leapfrogging.

Rather than directly challenging the dollar, China is creating alternatives that reduce systemic dependence on U.S.-controlled financial networks. The success of this strategy depends not just on economic fundamentals, but on China’s unique ability to combine market forces with state intervention—a model that continues to surprise both optimists and pessimists.

The next decade will likely determine whether we witness gradual erosion of dollar dominance or its continued resilience in the face of systematic challenges. The lesson from the Rogers-Chanos debate is that China’s development trajectory will likely continue surprising analysts, requiring frameworks that account for the distinctive Chinese model of managed capitalism and strategic patience.