“亿元骗补案”背后的出口数据灰色地带
Di Yi Cai Jing·2025-11-27 12:08

Core Viewpoint - The article highlights the issue of "buying export" practices in China, where companies exploit government subsidy policies by creating shell companies to falsely report export data, leading to significant financial fraud involving over 1 billion yuan in subsidies [1][4][5]. Group 1: Case Overview - A major fraud case in Wuhan involved multiple defendants who established shell companies to purchase export data from legitimate businesses, resulting in the fraudulent acquisition of government export subsidies [1][3]. - The case, which began in January 2024, has revealed that similar fraudulent activities have been occurring across various regions in China for years, with local governments often turning a blind eye [1][4][5]. Group 2: Mechanism of Fraud - The defendants registered over 90 shell companies in various cities, using these entities to apply for export qualifications and generate false export data through customs [4][5]. - The fraudulent scheme involved paying intermediaries for "export buying" and subsequently applying for government subsidies based on inflated export values, with the defendants quickly dissolving the companies to evade tax scrutiny [5][6]. Group 3: Government Involvement - Evidence suggests that local government officials were aware of the "buying export" practices, with some even encouraging such activities to meet export performance targets [9][10]. - The article indicates that the issuance of export subsidies was often based solely on customs data, with little to no verification of the actual business operations of the companies involved [14]. Group 4: Legal and Regulatory Context - The article discusses the varying interpretations and enforcement of laws regarding "buying export" practices across different regions, leading to inconsistent legal outcomes for similar cases [13][15]. - Some defendants in past cases have faced different charges, such as providing false documentation, rather than fraud, highlighting the complexities in legal interpretations of these practices [16].

“亿元骗补案”背后的出口数据灰色地带 - Reportify