Chinese economist Gao Shanwen dies at the age of 55, raised questions on the government figures of the country’s GDP growth

New Delhi. The country’s leading economist Gao Shanwen, who had outspoken views on the Chinese economy and capital market, died at the age of 55. Chinese state media has cited illness as the cause of his death. However, many discussions are taking place on social media regarding his death. Gao was the former chief economist at government investment group SDIC Securities. He was counted among China’s most influential macro-economists.

Read :- Raisina Dialogue 2026: S Jaishankar, said – Technology and demography will decide the direction of the world in the change of global system, today ‘no country can call itself the supreme power’

Gao Shanwen raised questions on government figures of GDP growth

Gao Shanwen made headlines in late 2024 when he claimed at an international conference held in Washington that China’s real GDP growth between 2021 and 2023 averaged around 2 percent, while the government kept reporting it to be around 5 percent. He said that the figures related to consumption, employment and real estate did not match the official claims.

Actions and censorship following statements

According to reports, China’s top leadership was angered by his statement. After this, he was banned from speaking publicly, his articles, videos and social media accounts were deleted. He was also fired from his job in November 2025 and his Hong Kong investment advisor license was also terminated.

Gao was battling cancer

According to sources close to the matter, Gao had told people close to him that he was diagnosed with cancer in January 2025. After staying away from public life for almost a year, he made a brief appearance via video message at a program at Peking University in September 2025.

On Chinese social media, people paid tribute to him calling him a ‘truth-speaking economist’

After Gao’s death, people on Chinese social media paid tribute to him, calling him a ‘truth-speaking economist’. Many users wrote that now only voices supporting the “government line” are left. This case has once again intensified the debate in China on freedom of expression, transparency of economic data and the government’s attitude towards dissent.