香港融资骗局肆虐，民营企业225万血本无归

Core Insights - A well-designed cross-border financing scam has been uncovered, where a mainland private enterprise lost 2.25 million yuan while seeking 150 million yuan in financing, ultimately facing breach of contract penalties [1][29]. Group 1: Scam Initiation - The scam began with a Shenzhen intermediary contacting the enterprise, claiming to have a funding source in Hong Kong that could quickly provide loans [2]. - During a meeting in Hong Kong, the funding representative displayed interest in the enterprise's project and showcased bank account proof of financial capability, which built trust [2][3]. Group 2: Fee Structure - The first step involved the enterprise being instructed to establish a Hong Kong company as a funding platform, despite already having one, leading to unnecessary registration fees [4]. - The funding party required a loan agreement to be signed with a lawyer's witness, costing 320,000 HKD, which the enterprise paid half of [4]. Group 3: Additional Costs - After completing external debt registration, the funding party claimed that the 150 million yuan was ready but required the funds to be deposited into a Hong Kong company account, demanding a 1% upfront fee of 1.5 million yuan for the transfer [13]. - The enterprise signed a currency exchange service contract and transferred 1.5 million yuan to a designated personal account [13]. Group 4: Regulatory Complications - Following the currency exchange, the funding party insisted on fund supervision, leading to an additional payment of 428,000 yuan for regulatory fees [28]. - The enterprise was also required to undergo an asset evaluation, incurring another 160,000 yuan in costs for a vague electronic report [28]. Group 5: Unraveling the Scam - In December 2024, the funding party demanded the enterprise to complete a share pledge operation, which ultimately could not be fulfilled, revealing the scam [30][31]. - Over the course of a year, the enterprise paid nearly 2.25 million yuan in various fees without receiving any financing, leading to significant operational losses [29][31]. Group 6: Scam Characteristics - The scam exhibited several characteristics: leveraging Hong Kong's financial credibility, using professional jargon to create a façade of legitimacy, and introducing multiple related companies to extract fees [32]. - The scammers targeted financially desperate mainland enterprises, exploiting their urgency and trust [32][33]. Group 7: Prevention Recommendations - Experts recommend that enterprises seeking financing should be wary of high upfront fees, mandatory use of affiliated service providers, complex processes with new requirements, and excessive promises [34]. - Legitimate funding sources typically cover their own due diligence costs and do not impose significant upfront fees, emphasizing the need for transparency in financing processes [34].