Workflow
60天的账期承诺,尚未打消中小供应商的焦虑
Xin Lang Cai Jing·2025-06-17 08:05

Core Viewpoint - The recent commitment by 17 major Chinese automakers to shorten supplier payment cycles to 60 days has not alleviated concerns within the supply chain, as many manufacturers express skepticism about the enforceability of this change and the potential for companies to circumvent the new regulations [1][3][4] Group 1: Payment Cycle Changes - 17 major automakers, including BYD and Geely, announced a reduction in supplier payment cycles to within 60 days after discussions with regulatory authorities [1] - Despite this commitment, many suppliers remain worried about the long-standing issue of extended payment cycles, with some manufacturers indicating that they may use alternative financial instruments like acceptance bills to delay cash payments [1][3] - Only SAIC Motor and BAIC Group explicitly stated they would not use acceptance bills, while other companies did not clarify their payment methods [1] Group 2: Impact on Suppliers - The Ministry of Industry and Information Technology highlighted that excessively long payment terms have exacerbated cash flow crises for suppliers, particularly affecting small and medium-sized enterprises [3] - A high-ranking executive from a company supplying automotive lighting components noted that payment cycles from clients often exceed six months, making survival increasingly difficult for smaller suppliers [3] Group 3: Market Dynamics and Risks - The automotive industry is experiencing a significant shift, with the number of brands exiting the electric vehicle market exceeding those entering for the first time in 2024, indicating a potential market contraction [4] - The ongoing price war in the electric vehicle sector is creating systemic risks, as leading companies extend payment terms to alleviate financial pressure, which in turn impacts supplier profitability [4] - The Ministry's new regulations and the automakers' commitment to a 60-day payment cycle face three main challenges: limited benefits for multi-tier suppliers, potential circumvention of regulations through alternative financing methods, and increased financial strain on automakers due to the competitive landscape [4] Group 4: Recommendations and Industry Transition - Suggestions to address the supply chain crisis include implementing differentiated payment terms based on supplier size and developing financial tools like supply chain asset-backed securities and credit insurance to mitigate bad debt risks for small enterprises [5] - The data indicating a 12% year-on-year increase in the average export price of Chinese new energy vehicles from January to May 2025 suggests a shift towards higher-end products, reflecting the industry's transition from rapid growth to a more mature market [5]