本报告持续跟踪地方债置换隐债、地方隐债清零和退平台进度，并基于城投债募集资金用途特征、"市场化经营主体"声明等债券发行特征，更新兴业研究 界定的城投名单。具体用于化债的地方债发行规模统计、城投界定名单于兴魔方®（X-CUBE®）同步更新。 2025年1-8月，特殊新增专项债发行额已超过2024年全年发行额以及每年8000亿元的用于补充政府性基金财力额度，据此推断，在用于化债的额度之外， 中央可能专门下发了用于消化拖欠企业账款的新增专项债额度，或成为地方债务风险化解的补充资金来源。根据Wind和DM数据统计，2025年1-8月，各 地方政府累计发行置换隐债专项债、特殊新增专项债（根据未披露"一案两书"的新增专项债统计）19333.6、9679.5亿元，其中，特殊新增专项债发行额已 超去年全年发行总额，并且高于每年8000亿元的用于补充政府性基金财力的额度。我们此前报告已提示过，用于消化拖欠企业账款的新增专项债同样不会 披露"一案两书"，当前特殊新增专项债发行额度已超过每年8000亿元的用于补充政府性基金财力的额度，或显示用于消化拖欠企业账款的新增专项债可能 不占用用于化债的每年8000亿元新增专项债额度。 多地 ...

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the optimization and adjustment of the evaluation mechanism for the New Wealth Best Analyst Awards starting in 2025, focusing on enhancing the research service experience and reducing non-research-related influences in the voting process [2][6]. Group 1: Mechanism Adjustments - The evaluation will shift from individual analyst assessments to a focus on "industry + research institution," eliminating the need for individual declarations [3]. - Only the names of research institutions will be published, not individual analysts, to prevent personnel changes or short-term controversies from affecting voting judgments [4]. - Research institutions can disclose their team members post-award for internal motivation and external promotion [5]. Group 2: Rationale for Adjustments - The traditional "declaration-display-voting" chain, while easy to disseminate, has been found to be susceptible to non-research influences, undermining the professional value of the evaluation [7]. - The adjustments aim to return to the essence of research services, allowing buyers to make professional judgments based on their research service experiences [8]. - The changes will facilitate a horizontal scan of all market research institutions by buyers [9]. - The adjustments seek to minimize irrational factors in the evaluation process, such as personnel fluctuations and vote-buying phenomena [10]. - The goal is to provide buyers with a cleaner, more focused, and efficient evaluation path [11]. - The market's attention is intended to shift from "star individuals" to "stable delivery capabilities," promoting the overall system construction of research institutions [12]. Group 3: Buyer Voting Experience - The new mechanism is expected to simplify the voting decision for buyers, allowing them to assess whether an institution provides trustworthy research services without recalling individual analyst names [14]. - Voting criteria will be more stable, unaffected by analyst job changes [15]. Group 4: Evaluation Positioning - The evaluation remains a third-party service assessment mechanism based on independent buyer judgment, providing authoritative references for buyers' research resource allocation and service procurement decisions [17]. - The evaluation will continue to serve as an important benchmark for measuring the professional capabilities of research institutions [18]. - A "buyer classification ranking" will be established based on different types of buyer institutions, enhancing the voice of voters and promoting broader service improvements and resource optimization [18].