High up Shenzhen’s Ping An Finance Center—the world’s fifth-tallest skyscraper—is a modest one-bedroom demo apartment. It’s well-furnished, smartly designed, and wouldn’t be out of place in one of China’s top cities.
But the floor space and furnishings aren’t what’s most interesting about the flat. There are sensors in the ceiling, meant to automatically detect when an occupant has fallen. A display in the mirror shows vital signs recorded overnight. A touch screen provides a direct connection to a concierge, portrayed by an AI-generated avatar of a young woman.
The apartment is part of Ping An’s bid for the “silver economy,” focused on helping retirees looking for health care, education, and entertainment. The insurer is targeting China’s elderly, whose numbers will soon rival the entire U.S. population.
“People who don’t have sufficient financial resources can rely on the government. People who want a bit more can choose Ping An,” says Michael Guo, Ping An’s co-CEO and the man responsible for its health care and eldercare strategy.
One of China’s largest private companies, Ping An is making its bid for health care at an opportune time. China is rapidly aging as birth rates plummet. Two decades ago, China’s median age was 32; now, it’s just past 40. Most discussions of China’s demographic crisis focus on the downside: a steep decline in China’s working-age population, the source of the country’s manufacturing and economic boom.
But China’s demographic transition is only a crisis for some. The silver economy—centered on a fast-growing, newly wealthy, newly curious, and newly independent cohort over age 50—could be worth billions to companies like Ping An that are trying to combine technology and smart design to serve an aging society.
“If you didn’t adapt to the changing nature of your population, you’re going to be left behind,” says Stuart Gietel-Basten, a demography expert at the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology. “It’s a natural shift in the population structure, and if you kept doing everything the same, you’d be an idiot.”
As the rest of the world ages, Ping An’s—and China’s—experience could show how a silver future might work.
With 242 million retail customers, Ping An, founded in 1988, dwarfs the U.S.’s largest insurance company, UnitedHealth Group, and its 152 million clients. Most of Ping An’s business is insurance—property, auto, health, and so on—but it also owns one of the country’s largest banks, Ping An Bank, and a U.S.-listed fintech platform, OneConnect.
Ping An’s rise in revenue: 8% Ping An Insurance brought in a reported $158.6 billion in revenue in 2024, helping it jump six spots to No. 47 on this year’s Global 500.
Ping An Insurance, the group’s publicly listed arm, reported $158.6 billion in revenue last year, a nearly 8.8% rise from the year before. That puts it at No. 47 on this year’s Global 500, jumping six spots from last year. Ping An is also the second-highest-ranked private Chinese company on the list, behind e-commerce giant JD.com but ahead of other household names like Alibaba and Tencent.
Guo joined Ping An in 2019 from Boston Consulting Group, where he was a managing director and partner. He served as Ping An’s chief human resources officer and headed up its property and casualty insurance business before rising to co-CEO in 2023, now working alongside co-CEO Xie Yonglin.
China has been a tricky place to do business since Guo joined six years ago. After COVID came a brief crackdown on China’s tech sector, and the collapse of the country’s property bubble dragged down both stock markets and household consumption. Ping An’s revenue declined by 9% in 2022, then by almost 20% the following year.
Still, Guo is optimistic that Ping An, and China, have turned a corner. “We’ve done a significant amount of work de-risking some of our portfolios related to the Chinese macroeconomy,” he said, pointing to Chinese stocks and property, adding that improving optimism over the Chinese economy thanks to strong stock market performance also helped.
U.S. President Donald Trump’s global trade war, which places 55% tariffs on China, threatens to complicate things again. Ping An generates almost all of its revenue in China, whether on the mainland or in the Chinese city of Hong Kong. Yet the company’s asset portfolio is global, meaning it’s exposed to global macroeconomic shifts. (For example: Ping An is one of HSBC’s largest shareholders.)
That means the trade war is a problem for Ping An. “When we invest overseas, we have to think about which countries and industries are going to perform in the next five to 10 years. When we invest domestically, we think about which industries or regions will be impacted by the tariffs,” Guo explains.
And if China’s economy does get dragged down by Trump’s tariffs, that will rebound on Ping An. “We rely on Chinese people to buy our insurance policies, to bank with us, to buy credit cards, and so on,” he adds. “If they don’t have stable jobs, they make less money or they’re more pessimistic about the future; that will impact how they interact with financial institutions.”
Guo is now in charge of Ping An’s “health care and elderly care” strategy and its technology endeavors, putting him at the forefront of what he calls the company’s “next phase of growth.”
Ping An’s health care business is small compared with the broader group, generating just $680 million in revenue last year. Senior care services delivered just $39 million in sales—and that’s after a 400% increase. But Ping An plans to leverage its broader customer base, funneling its millions of health insurance customers to its health care and eldercare services, supercharged by its decades-long investment in AI. It’s a lucrative opportunity, if it works.
China’s population has shrunk by about 4 million since 2021. The rates of new births and marriages have also plummeted. China’s Ministry of Civil Affairs estimates the country’s elderly population will grow by about 10 million a year over the next decade.
Beijing is scrambling: By 2021, it had removed all family planning restrictions, including the infamous “one child policy.” Local Chinese governments now offer cash incentives as high as $14,000 to encourage people to have children.
China’s social safety net is underdeveloped for its sizable economy. Just over a billion people are enrolled in a state-managed basic pension, yet payouts can be as little as under $25 a month. Corporate pensions are rare, and private pension accounts are just getting off the ground. In 2019, the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences warned that China’s state pension fund risked running out of money by 2035.
Beijing is fiddling with policy on the older end of the age spectrum. Last year, it hiked the retirement age: 63 for men; 58 and 55 for women in white-collar and blue-collar jobs, respectively.
Businesses are already adapting to a China with fewer workers and more DINKs (double income, no kids). Some markets, like pet care, are booming, while others, like dairy, are looking at an uncertain future.
Part of that shift is the silver economy: goods and services targeting China’s growing elderly population, coupled with more opportunities to continue working into old age.
“The Chinese government is trying its very best to provide a layer ov social welfare and senior care facilities,” Guo says, adding that it doesn’t have the financial strength to make sure that coverage is deep enough. Instead, the government is focused on ensuring that everyone has at least some coverage.
“If you look at the 50-year-olds of today, they’re completely different from the 50-year-olds of 30 years go.” STUART GIETEL-BASTEN, PROFESSOR OF SOCIAL SCIENCE AND PUBLIC POLICY, THE HONG KONG UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
But that’s not good enough for China’s middle-class families, who have built up family wealth in the decades since the country opened up its economy. “There’s a mismatch between what’s available provided by the government and what’s demanded by middle-class consumers and families. And this is where we see opportunities for Ping An to bridge the gap,” Guo explains
It’s a lucrative gap: Chinese officials predict the silver economy could grow to 30 trillion yuan ($4.2 trillion) by 2035.
Gietel-Basten doesn’t think that China’s declining population necessarily spells doom. “If you look at the 50-year-olds of today, they’re completely different from the 50-yearolds of 30 years ago,” he explains. “This is what we call ‘demographic metabolism’ of populations: getting older and smaller, but also healthier, more educated, more skilled.”
Ping An isn’t the only insurer betting on a wave of elderly customers. AIA, No. 417 on the Global 500, is also bullish on the silver economy, building new products like wealth management, wellness programs, and home care for it.
Li Dou, who heads Ping An Health, explains that there’s a “90-7-3” distribution when it comes to aging in China: 90% age at home, 7% get community-based care, and 3% go to dedicated senior care facilities.
Even better with age: Chief of Ping An Health Li Dou sees opportunity
in China’s rapidly aging
population.
Qilai Shen/Panos Pictures for Fortune
He points to a few distinct customer segments—those who live alone in China’s second or third-tier cities, after their children moved to more economically vibrant cities; “early seniors” in early retirement now free to travel and seek out new experiences; and the 80-plus crowd who need more constant care.
Thanks to its insurance business, Ping An already has access to a vast network of hospitals, pharmacies, and home care groups. But the insurance giant now owns several dozen health institutions throughout the country as well, including six tertiary hospitals. It’s also building out several “alliances” beyond just medical services to support the silver economy.
For example, Ping An now collaborates with universities to offer educational lectures to its customers who, Li says, lacked opportunities for a high-quality education in their youth. It’s also setting up package tours with cultural itineraries, health-conscious meals, and hotels designed specifically for older travelers.
This focus on entertainment suits the next generation who, thanks to having smaller families, have far more wealth to spend on themselves. “The next silver generation don’t have grandchildren, don’t have children— they’ll put more resources into themselves and look for opportunities to learn things, volunteer, and even get back to work,” says Dicky Chow, head of health care at think tank Our Hong Kong Foundation.
Still, health is an expensive business. Ping An Health made a slim $12 million profit last year, its first since being established in 2014. The company lost $46 million in 2023.
“It requires a lot of capital to acquire health care and senior care providers. You need to build senior care communities, and it’s very time-consuming to complete such projects and build up a brand in the health and senior care business,” explains Iris Tan, an analyst at Morningstar.
But Ping An’s bid for the silver economy is underpinned by a decade-long bet on AI, which it’s poured billions of dollars into, even before OpenAI’s ChatGPT forced every company to adopt the new technology.
Its AI technologies include a fraud detection tool and software that can generate an artificial voice from just a few real-world samples. Others are more spiritual, like a Buddhist chatbot accessible to Ping An employees, “which can talk to you just like a monk,” says Xiao Jing, Ping An’s chief scientist. “It’s highly dependable.”
Aging with AI: Ping An is leaning into AI for the elderly with the help of chief scientist Xiao Jing.
Anthony Kwan for Fortune
And Ping An is leaning into AI for the elderly. Xiao suggests that AI is better suited for middle-aged and older users, who might appreciate the choice of AI-generated voices and avatars, whether it’s a voice and appearance that reminds them of their grandchild or an avatar resembling their professor.
And the next generation of elderly people won’t be strangers to digital technology, Chow says: “In the next 10 to 20 years, there’s going to be a drastic shift [in digital literacy].”
Beijing isn’t the only government grappling with a demographic crisis. Japan’s population has been shrinking since 2010, forcing the government to consider robotics and automation as a way to look after its aging population. South Korea has the world’s lowest fertility rate, leading local governments to consider drastic measures like government-endorsed matchmaking services.
The U.S., too, will have its own aging problems. The U.S.’s total fertility rate is at 1.6, a record low, and hasn’t been above 2.1, the so-called replacement rate, since the early ’90s. The Population Reference Bureau projects that 82 million Americans will be over the age of 65 by 2050, nearly a quarter of the population.
China’s demographic decline is often presented as a long-term risk, but might it instead prove an opportunity? If China— which is facing a much larger elderly population with far fewer resources— can grow a vibrant silver economy, could other countries do the same?
The world’s second-largest economy is barreling ahead on automation, applying industrial robots to its manufacturing sector to make up for scarcer, more expensive—and soon rarer—workers. AI, too, might help provide care for seniors without dedicating masses of people to run health concierges and administer tests.
In that case, China’s demographic crisis may prove to be more opportunity than crisis.
This article appears in the August/September 2025: Asia issue of Fortune with the headline “Ping An’s next frontier: China’s ‘Silver Economy.’”
The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CRFB) is a nonpartisan watchdog that regularly estimates how much the U.S. Congress is adding to the $38 trillion national debt.
With enhanced Affordable Care Act (ACA) subsidies due to expire within days, some Senate Democrats are scrambling to protect millions of Americans from getting the unpleasant holiday gift of spiking health insurance premiums. The CRFB says there’s just one problem with the plan: It’s not funded.
“With the national debt as large as the economy and interest payments costing $1 trillion annually, it is absurd to suggest adding hundreds of billions more to the debt,” CRFB President Maya MacGuineas wrote in a statement on Friday afternoon.
The proposal, backed by members of the Senate Democratic caucus, would fully extend the enhanced ACA subsidies for three years, from 2026 through 2028, with no additional income limits on who can qualify. Those subsidies, originally boosted during the pandemic and later renewed, were designed to lower premiums and prevent coverage losses for middle‑ and lower‑income households purchasing insurance on the ACA exchanges.
CRFB estimated that even this three‑year extension alone would add roughly $300 billion to federal deficits over the next decade, largely because the federal government would continue to shoulder a larger share of premium costs while enrollment and subsidy amounts remain elevated. If Congress ultimately moves to make the enhanced subsidies permanent—as many advocates have urged—the total cost could swell to nearly $550 billion in additional borrowing over the next decade.
Reversing recent guardrails
MacGuineas called the Senate bill “far worse than even a debt-financed extension” as it would roll back several “program integrity” measures that were enacted as part of a 2025 reconciliation law and were intended to tighten oversight of ACA subsidies. On top of that, it would be funded by borrowing even more. “This is a bad idea made worse,” MacGuineas added.
The watchdog group’s central critique is that the new Senate plan does not attempt to offset its costs through spending cuts or new revenue and, in their view, goes beyond a simple extension by expanding the underlying subsidy structure.
The legislation would permanently repeal restrictions that eliminated subsidies for certain groups enrolling during special enrollment periods and would scrap rules requiring full repayment of excess advance subsidies and stricter verification of eligibility and tax reconciliation. The bill would also nullify portions of a 2025 federal regulation that loosened limits on the actuarial value of exchange plans and altered how subsidies are calculated, effectively reshaping how generous plans can be and how federal support is determined. CRFB warned these reversals would increase costs further while weakening safeguards designed to reduce misuse and error in the subsidy system.
MacGuineas said that any subsidy extension should be paired with broader reforms to curb health spending and reduce overall borrowing. In her view, lawmakers are missing a chance to redesign ACA support in a way that lowers premiums while also improving the long‑term budget outlook.
The debate over ACA subsidies recently contributed to a government funding standoff, and CRFB argued that the new Senate bill reflects a political compromise that prioritizes short‑term relief over long‑term fiscal responsibility.
“After a pointless government shutdown over this issue, it is beyond disappointing that this is the preferred solution to such an important issue,” MacGuineas wrote.
The off-year elections cast the government shutdown and cost-of-living arguments in a different light. Democrats made stunning gains and almost flipped a deep-red district in Tennessee as politicians from the far left and center coalesced around “affordability.”
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer is reportedly smelling blood in the water and doubling down on the theme heading into the pivotal midterm elections of 2026. President Donald Trump is scheduled to visit Pennsylvania soon to discuss pocketbook anxieties. But he is repeating predecessor Joe Biden’s habit of dismissing inflation, despite widespread evidence to the contrary.
“We fixed inflation, and we fixed almost everything,” Trump said in a Tuesday cabinet meeting, in which he also dismissed affordability as a “hoax” pushed by Democrats.
Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle now face a politically fraught choice: allow premiums to jump sharply—including in swing states like Pennsylvania where ACA enrollees face double‑digit increases—or pass an expensive subsidy extension that would, as CRFB calculates, explode the deficit without addressing underlying health care costs.
Netflix Inc. has won the heated takeover battle for Warner Bros. Discovery Inc. Now it must convince global antitrust regulators that the deal won’t give it an illegal advantage in the streaming market.
The $72 billion tie-up joins the world’s dominant paid streaming service with one of Hollywood’s most iconic movie studios. It would reshape the market for online video content by combining the No. 1 streaming player with the No. 4 service HBO Max and its blockbuster hits such as Game Of Thrones, Friends, and the DC Universe comics characters franchise.
That could raise red flags for global antitrust regulators over concerns that Netflix would have too much control over the streaming market. The company faces a lengthy Justice Department review and a possible US lawsuit seeking to block the deal if it doesn’t adopt some remedies to get it cleared, analysts said.
“Netflix will have an uphill climb unless it agrees to divest HBO Max as well as additional behavioral commitments — particularly on licensing content,” said Bloomberg Intelligence analyst Jennifer Rie. “The streaming overlap is significant,” she added, saying the argument that “the market should be viewed more broadly is a tough one to win.”
By choosing Netflix, Warner Bros. has jilted another bidder, Paramount Skydance Corp., a move that risks touching off a political battle in Washington. Paramount is backed by the world’s second-richest man, Larry Ellison, and his son, David Ellison, and the company has touted their longstanding close ties to President Donald Trump. Their acquisition of Paramount, which closed in August, has won public praise from Trump.
Comcast Corp. also made a bid for Warner Bros., looking to merge it with its NBCUniversal division.
The Justice Department’s antitrust division, which would review the transaction in the US, could argue that the deal is illegal on its face because the combined market share would put Netflix well over a 30% threshold.
The White House, the Justice Department and Comcast didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment.
US lawmakers from both parties, including Republican Representative Darrell Issa and Democratic Senator Elizabeth Warren have already faulted the transaction — which would create a global streaming giant with 450 million users — as harmful to consumers.
“This deal looks like an anti-monopoly nightmare,” Warren said after the Netflix announcement. Utah Senator Mike Lee, a Republican, said in a social media post earlier this week that a Warner Bros.-Netflix tie-up would raise more serious competition questions “than any transaction I’ve seen in about a decade.”
European Union regulators are also likely to subject the Netflix proposal to an intensive review amid pressure from legislators. In the UK, the deal has already drawn scrutiny before the announcement, with House of Lords member Baroness Luciana Berger pressing the government on how the transaction would impact competition and consumer prices.
The combined company could raise prices and broadly impact “culture, film, cinemas and theater releases,”said Andreas Schwab, a leading member of the European Parliament on competition issues, after the announcement.
Paramount has sought to frame the Netflix deal as a non-starter. “The simple truth is that a deal with Netflix as the buyer likely will never close, due to antitrust and regulatory challenges in the United States and in most jurisdictions abroad,” Paramount’s antitrust lawyers wrote to their counterparts at Warner Bros. on Dec. 1.
Appealing directly to Trump could help Netflix avoid intense antitrust scrutiny, New Street Research’s Blair Levin wrote in a note on Friday. Levin said it’s possible that Trump could come to see the benefit of switching from a pro-Paramount position to a pro-Netflix position. “And if he does so, we believe the DOJ will follow suit,” Levin wrote.
Netflix co-Chief Executive Officer Ted Sarandos had dinner with Trump at the president’s Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida last December, a move other CEOs made after the election in order to win over the administration. In a call with investors Friday morning, Sarandos said that he’s “highly confident in the regulatory process,” contending the deal favors consumers, workers and innovation.
“Our plans here are to work really closely with all the appropriate governments and regulators, but really confident that we’re going to get all the necessary approvals that we need,” he said.
Netflix will likely argue to regulators that other video services such as Google’s YouTube and ByteDance Ltd.’s TikTok should be included in any analysis of the market, which would dramatically shrink the company’s perceived dominance.
The US Federal Communications Commission, which regulates the transfer of broadcast-TV licenses, isn’t expected to play a role in the deal, as neither hold such licenses. Warner Bros. plans to spin off its cable TV division, which includes channels such as CNN, TBS and TNT, before the sale.
Even if antitrust reviews just focus on streaming, Netflix believes it will ultimately prevail, pointing to Amazon.com Inc.’s Prime and Walt Disney Co. as other major competitors, according to people familiar with the company’s thinking.
Netflix is expected to argue that more than 75% of HBO Max subscribers already subscribe to Netflix, making them complementary offerings rather than competitors, said the people, who asked not to be named discussing confidential deliberations. The company is expected to make the case that reducing its content costs through owning Warner Bros., eliminating redundant back-end technology and bundling Netflix with Max will yield lower prices.
Nearly all leading artificial intelligence developers are focused on building AI models that mimic the way humans reason, but new research shows these cutting-edge systems can be far more energy intensive, adding to concerns about AI’s strain on power grids.
AI reasoning models used 30 times more power on average to respond to 1,000 written prompts than alternatives without this reasoning capability or which had it disabled, according to a study released Thursday. The work was carried out by the AI Energy Score project, led by Hugging Face research scientist Sasha Luccioni and Salesforce Inc. head of AI sustainability Boris Gamazaychikov.
The researchers evaluated 40 open, freely available AI models, including software from OpenAI, Alphabet Inc.’s Google and Microsoft Corp. Some models were found to have a much wider disparity in energy consumption, including one from Chinese upstart DeepSeek. A slimmed-down version of DeepSeek’s R1 model used just 50 watt hours to respond to the prompts when reasoning was turned off, or about as much power as is needed to run a 50 watt lightbulb for an hour. With the reasoning feature enabled, the same model required 7,626 watt hours to complete the tasks.
The soaring energy needs of AI have increasingly come under scrutiny. As tech companies race to build more and bigger data centers to support AI, industry watchers have raised concerns about straining power grids and raising energy costs for consumers. A Bloomberg investigation in September found that wholesale electricity prices rose as much as 267% over the past five years in areas near data centers. There are also environmental drawbacks, as Microsoft, Google and Amazon.com Inc. have previously acknowledged the data center buildout could complicate their long-term climate objectives.
More than a year ago, OpenAI released its first reasoning model, called o1. Where its prior software replied almost instantly to queries, o1 spent more time computing an answer before responding. Many other AI companies have since released similar systems, with the goal of solving more complex multistep problems for fields like science, math and coding.
Though reasoning systems have quickly become the industry norm for carrying out more complicated tasks, there has been little research into their energy demands. Much of the increase in power consumption is due to reasoning models generating much more text when responding, the researchers said.
The new report aims to better understand how AI energy needs are evolving, Luccioni said. She also hopes it helps people better understand that there are different types of AI models suited to different actions. Not every query requires tapping the most computationally intensive AI reasoning systems.
“We should be smarter about the way that we use AI,” Luccioni said. “Choosing the right model for the right task is important.”
To test the difference in power use, the researchers ran all the models on the same computer hardware. They used the same prompts for each, ranging from simple questions — such as asking which team won the Super Bowl in a particular year — to more complex math problems. They also used a software tool called CodeCarbon to track how much energy was being consumed in real time.
The results varied considerably. The researchers found one of Microsoft’s Phi 4 reasoning models used 9,462 watt hours with reasoning turned on, compared with about 18 watt hours with it off. OpenAI’s largest gpt-oss model, meanwhile, had a less stark difference. It used 8,504 watt hours with reasoning on the most computationally intensive “high” setting and 5,313 watt hours with the setting turned down to “low.”
OpenAI, Microsoft, Google and DeepSeek did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Google released internal research in August that estimated the median text prompt for its Gemini AI service used 0.24 watt-hours of energy, roughly equal to watching TV for less than nine seconds. Google said that figure was “substantially lower than many public estimates.”
Much of the discussion about AI power consumption has focused on large-scale facilities set up to train artificial intelligence systems. Increasingly, however, tech firms are shifting more resources to inference, or the process of running AI systems after they’ve been trained. The push toward reasoning models is a big piece of that as these systems are more reliant on inference.
Recently, some tech leaders have acknowledged that AI’s power draw needs to be reckoned with. Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella said the industry must earn the “social permission to consume energy” for AI data centers in a November interview. To do that, he argued tech must use AI to do good and foster broad economic growth.