Core Viewpoint - The automotive industry is facing significant challenges due to extended payment terms, which are adversely affecting small and medium-sized suppliers, with the issue primarily directed at vehicle manufacturers [1][2]. Group 1: Payment Terms in the Automotive Supply Chain - The automotive supply chain has a clear hierarchical structure, consisting of Tier 1, Tier 2, and Tier 3 suppliers, where smaller suppliers often have weaker negotiating power [2]. - Vehicle manufacturers have historically held significant bargaining power, reflected in the disparity between accounts payable and accounts receivable turnover days, with the former being much higher [2]. - In a study of eight A-share listed passenger car companies, the average accounts receivable turnover period was 66 days, while the accounts payable turnover period averaged 182 days, resulting in a 116-day gap [2]. Group 2: Battery Manufacturers' Payment Terms - The issue of payment terms is even more pronounced among battery manufacturers, with an average accounts receivable turnover period of 103 days and an accounts payable turnover period of 255 days, leading to a 152-day difference [4]. - Leading battery manufacturer CATL exhibited a 2024 accounts receivable turnover period of 65 days, contrasted with a 259-day accounts payable turnover period, highlighting its strong negotiating position [5]. Group 3: Performance of Automotive Parts Companies - Among 255 A-share listed automotive parts companies, the average accounts payable turnover period was 142 days, while the accounts receivable turnover period was 116 days, resulting in a 26-day difference [5]. - Larger companies tend to have better cash collection capabilities, with a trend showing that as market capitalization increases, the accounts receivable turnover period decreases [6]. - Notable companies with strong performance include Fuyao Glass and Weichai Power, with accounts payable turnover periods of 81 days and 194 days, respectively [6]. Group 4: Industry Responsibility and Future Directions - To address the issue of extended payment terms, both vehicle manufacturers and leading parts suppliers must take responsibility for promoting healthy and high-quality industry development [7]. - The China Iron and Steel Industry Association emphasized the need for industry players, especially leading companies, to set an example and combat unhealthy competition to foster a healthier supply chain [7].

超长账期是整个汽车产业链的问题，并不单单只是整车。 汽车行业"内卷"态势下，超长账期拖垮中小供应商成为了市场关注重点，而问题矛头直指整车企业。整 车企业的账期问题也成为了监管重点，6月中旬，17家头部车企纷纷出来表态，将支付账期统一至60天 内。 而事实上，超长账期是整个汽车产业链的问题，并不单单只是整车。 传统汽车供应链具备明显的层级结构，分为一级供应商（Tier1）、二级供应商（Tier2）和三级供应商 （Tier3），一级供应商是与整车厂商直接签订供货合同的供应商，而二级供应商是为一级供应商提供 零部件或组件的供应商，三级供应商则位于供应链的底端。 因为产业链中大量中小企业在谈判中处于弱势地位，话语权较大的头部供应商"压榨"供应链底端企业、 供应商之间超长账期从上到下层层传导的现象并不少见。 很长一段时间以来，整车被认为在整个汽车产业链中占据了较强话语权，这体现在应付账款和应收账款 周转天数上，便呈现出前者远大于后者的现象，账期差也表明整车占用供应商资金较多，将财务压力往 上游传导。 值得注意的是，动力电池厂商亿纬锂能（265天）、孚能科技（273天）、国轩高科（282天）、中创新 航（282天）、鹏辉 ...

Core Viewpoint - The automotive supply chain is under significant pressure due to long payment terms, with 17 automakers committing to a 60-day payment term for suppliers, raising questions about the effectiveness of this solution in alleviating supply chain stress [1][2]. Group 1: Payment Terms and Supply Chain Pressure - The accounts receivable in the automotive parts industry have been increasing significantly since 2014, with some companies seeing a tenfold increase over a decade [2]. - Major automakers like BYD, Great Wall, and SAIC have accounts payable turnover days of 145, 153, and 177 days respectively, which is higher than competitors like Tesla and Volkswagen [2]. - The extended payment terms allow automakers to use the funds for price competition, placing financial strain on suppliers who are left waiting for payments [2][3]. Group 2: Execution Challenges of 60-Day Commitment - The 60-day commitment does not guarantee that suppliers will receive payments within that timeframe, as it often refers to the issuance of acceptance bills rather than cash payments [2][3]. - The payment process is fragmented, and suppliers may face delays in receiving cash even after the 60 days if they are given bills instead of cash [3]. Group 3: Settlement Methods and Financial Risks - Cash payments are preferred by suppliers, but most automakers use acceptance bills, which can extend the payment period further [3][4]. - Acceptance bills can be either bank-accepted or commercial, with commercial bills posing a higher risk of delayed payments [4]. - The implementation of regulations to protect small and medium enterprises from forced acceptance of non-cash payment methods has been introduced, but compliance varies among automakers [4]. Group 4: Industry Competition and Cost Pressures - The automotive industry is experiencing intense price competition, which is pushing cost pressures down the supply chain, affecting suppliers at all levels [6][7]. - Steel manufacturers have reported that automakers are demanding price reductions exceeding 10%, which is unsustainable for suppliers [6][7]. - The trend of demanding lower prices has become normalized, leading to detrimental effects on product quality and supplier viability [7][8].