民生证券涉迪嘉药业被警示保代被批评 现并入国联民生

Core Viewpoint - The Shenzhen Stock Exchange has issued regulatory measures against Minsheng Securities and other involved parties due to violations during the IPO process of Dijia Pharmaceutical Group Co., Ltd, highlighting issues related to independence, internal controls, and financial disclosures [1][2][8]. Group 1: Regulatory Actions - The Shenzhen Stock Exchange decided to take written warning measures against Minsheng Securities for failing to adequately address independence issues of the issuer [8][20]. - Minsheng Securities' representatives, Bao Jingjing and He Runyong, received public criticism for their inadequate scrutiny of the issuer's independence and internal control issues [22][28]. - The audit firm Tianjian CPA and its signatory accountants, Fei Fanghua and Peng Xianglian, were also criticized for not properly addressing internal control deficiencies [30][36]. Group 2: Issuer's Independence Issues - Dijia Pharmaceutical was found to have independence flaws, as it prioritized purchasing from suppliers controlled by its actual controller, leading to conflicts of interest [3][12][41]. - Employees from the controlling shareholder, Dishan Group, were involved in procurement processes, raising concerns about the independence of the issuer's operations [3][12][41]. - The issuer failed to disclose these independence issues in accordance with the relevant disclosure guidelines [12][41]. Group 3: Internal Control Deficiencies - The issuer's internal controls regarding procurement, sales, and inventory management were found to be inadequate, with missing documentation and improper handling of transactions [4][6][26]. - Significant payments made by Dishan Group and its subsidiaries were not properly verified, leading to questions about the legitimacy of these transactions [4][10][32]. - The issuer's handling of returns related to unsold products was also criticized, as the accounting treatment did not align with actual contractual agreements [19][40]. Group 4: Financial Disclosure Issues - The issuer's financial disclosures were deemed inaccurate, particularly regarding the treatment of returns, which should have impacted the 2020 revenue figures instead of 2019 [19][40]. - The audit and legal representatives failed to provide accurate assessments of the issuer's financial practices, leading to further regulatory scrutiny [30][42][46].