Core Viewpoint - The recent announcement by the China Internet Finance Association highlights compliance issues in supply chain finance, with three banks failing to submit required information, raising concerns about the industry's regulatory progress [1] Group 1: Regulatory Changes - The People's Bank of China and five other departments issued the "Document No. 77" to regulate supply chain finance, aiming to optimize financing for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and mitigate risks [1] - The new regulations are pushing the industry from "wild growth" to "standardization and transparency" [1][6] Group 2: Reasons for Non-Submission - One bank attributed its failure to submit information to delays in its data system, with updates expected next month [2] - Experts suggest three potential reasons for the non-submission: compliance adjustments and technical separation, strategic reassessment of business models, and pressures from data governance and system upgrades [3] Group 3: Industry Restructuring - The "Document No. 77" imposes strict requirements on banks regarding electronic receivables, emphasizing the need for platforms to return to their role as "information intermediaries" [4] - Nine types of prohibited activities have been identified, including issuing receivables without real trade backgrounds and extending payment terms without justification [4] Group 4: Future Development Trends - The industry is expected to experience a "pain period" in the short term, with a trend towards differentiation and consolidation, as compliance costs rise and weaker platforms exit the market [6] - Long-term trends indicate a shift towards services based on real trade backgrounds, integration of advanced technologies like blockchain and AI, and the establishment of an open ecosystem for supply chain finance [6]

Core Viewpoint - The Chinese Internet Finance Association has reported that 14 supply chain information service institutions have voluntarily applied to exit the accounts receivable certificate business, marking the first public list of institutions withdrawing since the issuance of the "77 Document" in February 2023, which aims to regulate supply chain financial services [1][2]. Regulatory Norms - A total of 217 supply chain information service institutions have registered with the association, with 206 reporting operational data and 186 submitting monthly business data. The association has established a routine self-discipline filing process for these institutions [2]. - The self-discipline filing management rules require institutions to submit a filing application, including a summary of accounts receivable electronic debt certificate business for the past three years and recommendations from at least three core enterprises and financing institutions [2]. Reasons for Withdrawal - Three main reasons for the voluntary withdrawal of institutions from the accounts receivable business have been identified: 1. Inability to meet the strict requirements set by the "77 Document" [3]. 2. Forced closure due to the prohibition of banks providing technical output services [3]. 3. Strategic shift towards supply chain bills, as banks are encouraged to support this development [3]. Business Specifics - The "77 Document" outlines nine types of businesses that will exit, including those without real trade backgrounds, those extending payment terms without justification, and those exceeding control limits on accounts receivable electronic debt certificates [4]. - The supply chain bill business is rapidly developing, with platforms attracting enterprises due to their compliance and policy support, leading to a shift from the accounts receivable certificate system [4]. Future Development - Despite some institutions exiting, the accounts receivable electronic debt certificate business still has core application scenarios, with over 500 platforms engaged in this business, and an annual issuance scale of 4 to 5 trillion yuan [5]. - Specific industries may explore alternative models that better fit their characteristics, ensuring the continuity of business functions [5]. Regulatory Framework - The introduction of the "77 Document" signifies the entry of the accounts receivable certificate business into a phase of compliance development, highlighting the need for further detailed regulatory guidelines to clarify core issues and execution standards [6].