华夏幸福百亿资金凭空消失，到底流进了谁的口袋？

Core Points - The debt committee of Huaxia Happiness has initiated a special financial due diligence on the company, authorized by Ping An Asset Management, to investigate its financial status due to concerns over the transparency of its debt restructuring plan and the whereabouts of funds [1][2] - Huaxia Happiness has faced significant financial distress, with total liabilities exceeding 400 billion yuan and a debt default of nearly 90 billion yuan since 2021, leading to the establishment of a debt committee for debt resolution [1][2] - The company has failed to meet its debt repayment commitments, with only about 5% of the promised cash repayments made to creditors by the end of 2023, while its cash reserves have plummeted from 14.4 billion yuan to 2.424 billion yuan [2] - Concerns have been raised regarding the legality and transparency of the company's pre-restructuring process, with creditors questioning the compliance of the announcement procedures and the appointment of a temporary management team without proper board approval [2][3] Summary by Sections Financial Due Diligence - The debt committee has authorized Ping An Asset Management to hire a major accounting firm for a special financial due diligence on Huaxia Happiness starting November 24, 2025 [1] Debt Restructuring Plan - Huaxia Happiness announced a debt restructuring plan in September 2021, aiming to reduce its asset-liability ratio to below 70% within 2-3 years, but has only managed to repay less than 5% of the promised cash to creditors [2] - The company has been accused of using depreciated assets to settle debts, raising questions about the legitimacy of its restructuring efforts [2] Legal and Compliance Issues - Legal experts have criticized the company's handling of the pre-restructuring process, suggesting that a thorough evaluation of the feasibility and necessity of such measures is essential, especially given the company's significant debt and the number of affected creditors [3] - The announcement of the pre-restructuring process has been challenged by creditors and internal board members, who argue that the procedures lacked transparency and proper governance [2][3]