六套房产置换来的千万元城投应收账款债权凭证 现在转不出去了！

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the challenges faced by individuals and companies in trading accounts receivable debt certificates backed by urban investment platforms, highlighting the difficulties in liquidity and market acceptance of these financial instruments [2][3][10]. Group 1: Accounts Receivable Debt Certificates - Accounts receivable debt certificates are issued by urban investment platforms and are intended for transfer or debt settlement, representing a new model for urban investment platforms to alleviate debt [2][3]. - The initial creditor of the certificates is the New Oriental Urban Investment Company, while the debtor is the Inner Mongolia Shengxiang Investment Company, with a maturity date set for November 29, 2028 [2][3]. Group 2: Investment and Exchange Process - An individual named Guo Pei exchanged six properties valued at approximately 650,000 yuan for accounts receivable debt certificates worth over 1,150,000 yuan, believing in the high liquidity of these certificates due to the backing of urban investment companies [4][7]. - The exchange was facilitated by a company named Hongsha Commerce, which promised high returns and a buyback option, further encouraging the investment [4][5]. Group 3: Market Challenges - Despite the initial optimism, Guo Pei found it difficult to transfer the certificates in the secondary market, leading to a realization that they had become "hot potatoes" with no willing buyers [3][9][10]. - Other individuals in similar situations reported challenges in receiving payments on their certificates, indicating a broader issue with the liquidity and marketability of these financial instruments [9][10]. Group 4: Regulatory and Market Context - The article mentions a regulatory framework emerging around accounts receivable electronic certificates, aimed at standardizing and managing these financial instruments to support small and medium enterprises and urban investment platforms [12][13]. - The Central Bank and other departments issued guidelines to regulate supply chain financial services, indicating a move towards more structured management of accounts receivable debt certificates [13].