文 | 野马财经 虞灝 编辑丨于婞 一场由新加坡主权财富基金在今年8月发起的罕见诉讼，把蔚来汽车推向了市场的关注焦点，也让其引 以为傲的电池即服务（BaaS）商业模式，一夜之间从"创新光环"变为财务欺诈指控的靶点。 北京时间10月16日，相关消息被媒体广泛报道，并引发蔚来汽车股价在中国香港、新加坡和美国三地市 场同步遭遇重挫。港股盘中一度暴跌13%，触及47港元的低点、新加坡股价下跌9.48%、美国盘前交易 也下跌超过7%。 10月16日晚间，蔚来方面回应称，本案件不是新发生的事件，并非针对蔚来近期经营状况，源于2022年 6月做空机构灰熊在一份做空报告中对蔚来的不实指控。 "这是几年前灰熊做空的后续，但不清楚近期为何有人炒作这件事情。"一位不具名的蔚来汽车高管 向"智通财经"表示。 新加坡"国家队"罕见下场，从蔚来看好者变成诉讼者？ 作为新加坡管理外汇储备的三大机构之一，新加坡主权财富基金成立于1981年，其使命是实现超越全球 通胀的长期稳定回报。据不同机构估算，其管理的资产规模高达8000亿至9360亿美元，是全球规模最 大、最具影响力的主权财富基金之一。 因此，新加坡主权财富基金此次主动发起诉讼显得并不 ...

Core Viewpoint - NIO's stock price plummeted over 13% following a lawsuit filed by Singapore's GIC, accusing the company of inflating revenue through its partnership with CATL and the establishment of Wuhan Weinan Battery Asset Company (Mirattery) [1][3][4] Group 1: Lawsuit Details - This lawsuit marks the first instance of a sovereign wealth fund suing a Chinese concept stock, raising significant trust issues for NIO's battery swapping narrative [2][4] - GIC claims that NIO artificially inflated its performance by prematurely recognizing revenue from battery leasing services, misleading investors about its financial health [6][10] - The lawsuit centers on NIO's "Battery as a Service" (BaaS) model, which separates vehicle ownership from battery ownership, allowing NIO to report stable rental income [5][6] Group 2: Financial Implications - GIC argues that NIO's accounting practices led to an exaggerated revenue growth, with reported revenue jumping from under 30 billion yuan to over 66 billion yuan in a single quarter [6][7] - If GIC's claims are validated, NIO may need to restate its financials, significantly impacting its reported revenues and potentially leading to legal repercussions for misleading disclosures [14][27] Group 3: GIC's Background and Strategy - GIC, established in 1981, manages nearly $800 billion in assets and is known for its long-term investment strategy, emphasizing returns that exceed global inflation [17][19] - The fund has a history of litigation to protect its investments, having previously sued companies for misleading disclosures, indicating a strategic approach to safeguarding its assets [20][21][22] Group 4: Broader Industry Implications - The lawsuit signals a shift in the role of sovereign wealth funds from passive investors to active governance participants, reflecting a growing intolerance for accounting irregularities [29][30] - GIC's actions may set a precedent for increased scrutiny of Chinese companies listed abroad, potentially leading to stricter disclosure requirements and greater accountability from third-party auditors [31]