最近，高速公路领域传来大消息：浙江宁波绕城高速西段从11月起永久免费，G30连霍高速西宝段也将在12月到期停收！加上之前免费的四川成绵高速、成 都城北出口高速、武汉天河机场高速等，全国已有十余条高速（约三百公里）告别收费，覆盖湖南、四川、湖北、广东等地。这下，司机朋友们可高兴坏 了：以后开车跑高速，钱包能省下一大笔！不过，高速免费真的能全面铺开吗？背后又有哪些挑战？咱们今天就来好好聊聊。 这事儿得从高速公路的"寿命"说起。根据《收费公路管理条例》，高速收费不是想收多久就收多久：政府还贷公路最多收15年，经营性公路最多25年，中西 部偏远地区能延长到20年、30年。一旦到期，必须停止收费。为啥这么规定？因为早期修高速主要靠"贷款修路、收费还贷"，用通行费还银行的钱。如今几 十年过去，首批90年代建的高速陆续"还完债"，自然要回归公益属性，免费让老百姓用。 比如四川成绵高速，一免费首周车流量就激增30%，成都到绵阳通勤族单程省下50元，物流企业成本降了12?5%。还有陕西的西宝高速，12月到期后直接拆 收费站，西安到宝鸡通行费全免，两地居民探亲、旅游、做生意都更方便，甚至带动了沿线餐饮、民宿的发展。说白了，高速免 ...

Group 1: Report Industry Investment Rating - Not mentioned in the provided content Group 2: Core Views of the Report - In H1 2025, the issuance scale of urban investment bonds hit a three - year low, with negative net financing for four consecutive months from March to June. The credit risk of urban investment bonds slightly converged, and credit ratings were mainly upgraded. It is expected that the issuance scale from July to December will be about 2.4 trillion yuan, and the net outflow may exceed 100 billion yuan [2][12]. - The current urban investment financing policy is strict, and it is necessary to optimize the policy to support new investment space. Although the "package debt resolution" has achieved results, urban investment enterprises still face heavy debt pressure. The "14th Five - Year Plan" period will bring new opportunities and challenges to the urban investment industry, but enterprises face problems such as weak asset liquidity. The "platform exit" of urban investment may lead to new problems, and it is necessary to guide and regulate the transformation [7][8][9]. - The credit spread of urban investment bonds still has room for compression. It is recommended to allocate high - quality enterprise targets in strong regions and pay attention to new issuers of bonds during the transformation [11]. Group 3: Summary by Relevant Catalogs I. Five Characteristics of the Urban Investment Bond Market Operation in H1 2025 - **Issuance scale at a three - year low, negative net financing at home and abroad**: The issuance scale was 2.77 trillion yuan, a year - on - year decrease of 12.15%. The net financing was - 120.004 billion yuan, with four consecutive months of net outflows from March to June. The overseas issuance scale decreased by 12.29% year - on - year, and the net outflow was 34.484 billion yuan. Only provincial and AAA - rated urban investment entities had positive net financing [2][17][18]. - **Overall decline in issuance interest rates, small decline for weak - quality bonds**: The weighted average issuance interest rate was 2.40%, a year - on - year decrease of 0.41 percentage points. The decline of weak - quality and low - level entities was less than that of stronger ones, and the AA - level entities' interest rates increased [30]. - **Long - term issuance trend, high proportion of debt replacement**: The weighted average term was 3.89 years, a year - on - year increase of 0.24 years. The proportion of private placement bonds rose to the first place. The broad and narrow debt replacement ratios reached 97.57% and 94.13% respectively [37]. - **Decline in trading volume, compression of trading spreads**: The trading volume decreased by 14.86% year - on - year, and the trading spreads compressed compared with the end of 2024 [42]. - **Deeper net outflows in non - key regions**: 13 provinces had a 100% debt replacement ratio, with 10 being key provinces. Jilin and Chongqing issued project - construction urban investment bonds. Key provinces had a total net outflow of 36.308 billion yuan, and non - key provinces had a total net outflow of 83.696 billion yuan [45]. II. Slight Convergence of Urban Investment Credit Risks, Upward - Adjusted Credit Ratings - **Convergence of non - standard default risks, decline in commercial bill overdue times**: There were 3 non - standard default events in H1, all trust product over - dues in Henan, Shandong, and Shaanxi. By May, 52 urban investment enterprises were on the commercial bill overdue list, with 100 times on the list, a year - on - year decrease of 10 enterprises and 17 times [56]. - **Upward - adjusted credit ratings, mainly in Shanghai, Hunan, and Guangdong**: 25 urban investment platforms had 44 rating adjustments. 14 entities had upward - adjusted main body ratings, and 2 had downward - adjusted ones. 27 bond items were upgraded, and 2 were downgraded [58]. - **Significant decline in abnormal trading volume and scale, frequent in Shandong and Guizhou**: 157 urban investment entities had 576 abnormal trades, with a scale of 23.332 billion yuan, a year - on - year decrease of 76.34%. Shandong and Guizhou had relatively large abnormal trading scales [60]. III. High Maturity and Put - Option Pressures, Difficult to Reverse the Net Outflow Trend, Expected Issuance Scale of about 2.4 Trillion from July to December - **Maturity and put - option scale of about 2.58 trillion from July to December**: By the end of June, the maturity scale was about 1.85 trillion yuan, and the put - option scale was 72.7022 billion yuan (assuming a 70% put - option ratio). Heilongjiang, Gansu, and Yunnan had relatively high maturity pressures [64]. - **Slight decline in the proportion of early redemption, more than half of bonds in Liaoning were redeemed early**: In H1, 700 bonds were redeemed early, with a total scale of 126.284 billion yuan, a year - on - year decrease of 11%. The proportion of early redemption to the total maturity scale was 4.36%, a slight year - on - year decrease. Liaoning had a high early - redemption proportion of 54.39% [68]. - **Expected issuance scale of about 2.4 trillion from July to December, net outflow may exceed 100 billion**: It is expected that there may still be months with negative net financing from July to December, with a total net outflow of about 100 - 150 billion yuan. The issuance scale is expected to be between 2.34 trillion and 2.50 trillion yuan. The debt replacement ratio will remain high, and the financing entity level may continue to move up [5][70][72]. IV. Follow - up Concerns and Investment Strategies (1) Follow - up Concerns - **Optimize financing policies**: The current policies are too strict. It is necessary to optimize policies from the perspective of ensuring financing cycles and economic development, such as refining "list - based management" and relaxing "government letter" requirements [7]. - **Accelerate debt replacement and relieve pressure**: Although the "package debt resolution" has achieved results, urban investment enterprises still face heavy debt pressure. It is recommended to accelerate debt replacement and include some operating debts and government arrears in the replacement scope [8]. - **Seize development opportunities during the "14th Five - Year Plan" period**: Urban investment enterprises face problems such as weak asset liquidity. They need to seize opportunities during the "14th Five - Year Plan" period, integrate resources, and control investment impulses [9]. - **Guide and standardize urban investment transformation**: The "platform exit" of urban investment may lead to new problems. Local governments need to guide the transformation direction and strengthen policy connection [10]. (2) Investment Strategies - The macro - environment is favorable for the bond market. The yield center may decline in H2 2025. The credit spread of urban investment bonds has room for compression. It is recommended to allocate high - quality targets in strong regions and pay attention to new issuers during the transformation [11][80].