Workflow
深圳龙岗深港国际中心综合体项目
icon
Search documents
独家|世茂239亿拿的地王或被68亿回收,中信信托深圳龙岗项目打折兑付计划起风波
Di Yi Cai Jing· 2025-07-18 08:02
Core Viewpoint - Shimao Group is facing significant challenges with its Shenzhen Longgang project, where a land recovery compensation plan has been proposed at a price of 6.8 billion yuan, approximately 30% of the original land acquisition cost of 23.9 billion yuan, leading to potential financial implications for investors and the trust involved [1][7][10]. Group 1: Compensation and Voting Process - The compensation for the land recovery is set at 6.8 billion yuan, which is significantly lower than the original acquisition cost, raising concerns among investors [1][10]. - Investors in the CITIC Longgang project can vote on the proposed compensation plan starting from July 18, with a beneficiary meeting scheduled for the end of the month [1][2]. - If the compensation plan is approved, a "discounted repayment" scheme will be implemented, with investors expected to recover approximately 85% of their principal by January 2027 [2][3]. Group 2: Project Background and Financial Implications - The Longgang project was initially a high-profile development, with plans for a skyscraper over 600 meters tall, but has faced delays and planning issues, leading to halted progress [1][11][12]. - The trust project was originally set to mature in August 2022, but has experienced liquidity issues since early 2022, resulting in payment delays [3][6]. - The project involves around 800 individual investors, with the trust principal balance currently at 5.679 billion yuan [6]. Group 3: Legal and Regulatory Challenges - Shimao Group has initiated legal proceedings against the Shenzhen government regarding the land transfer contract, claiming that the government has failed to provide necessary construction height approvals [12]. - The recovery plan requires approval from both the CITIC Longgang project and another related project, indicating a complex interdependency [7][8]. - The proposed compensation plan has been criticized for being insufficient and having a lengthy payment timeline, which could lead to further financial strain on the involved parties [10][12].