A subsidiary of the leading brand Arowana was involved in a 5 billion state-owned enterprise fraud that shocked the industry. Arowana's official announcement revealed that its subsidiary, Guangzhou Yihai, had unfortunately received accusations from the procuratorate.
According to the indictment, Guangzhou Yihai and its former general manager, Liu Degang, were suspected of assisting Yunnan Huijia and its person in charge Zhang Lihua in contract fraud while they were warehousing partners, and were found to be accomplices to the crime of contract fraud.
However, Arowana firmly denied it, insisting that Guangzhou Yihai's actions did not meet the definition of a unit crime.
Uncover a shocking case of state-owned asset loss fraud: the protagonist story of state-owned enterprises Anhui Huawen and Yunnan Huijia.
As an international leader, Huawen provides first-chain solutions to Huijia, which was once a key importer in the palm oil market.
However, between 2008 and 2014, Guangzhou Yihai, a subsidiary of Arowana, became a witness to the power-for-money transaction, and Zhang Lihua skillfully used bribery to turn the original advance payment transaction into a credit sale.
Not only did he take overpossession of the goods, but he also falsified statements to conceal the fact that he was in stock.
From 2012 to 2014, Zhang Lihua again bribed Chinese employees to conceal the world with the help of fake rights documents, resulting in Chinese suffering 32300 million yuan in direct losses and 20$1.5 billion in indirect losses.
Yu Ping and Liu Degang of Guangzhou Yihai were also involved, and their actions magnified the damage.
The fraud case by means of false promises and corruption has come to an end, and the relevant personnel of Yunnan Huijia, Zhang Lihua and Guangzhou Yihai have faced accusations of contract fraud and aiding.
Although Guangzhou Yihai has denied some of the allegations, the case involving the loss of huge amounts of state-owned assets has become clear.
Financing **leads** chain giant wheel, and it is necessary to be vigilant against its potential risks. Guangzhou Yihai revealed that the transaction between Anhui Huawen and Yunnan Huijia was actually a form of financing.
SASAC Circular No. 74 explicitly prohibits state-owned enterprises and central enterprises from engaging in false and financing, which emphasizes that capital advances and borrowings are essentially bypassing the commercial nature and giving the green light to other parties' financing.
Financing ** hides the loss of control of goods rights and capital risks, which is very easy to breed improper behavior, and must be strictly stopped.
However, under the pressure of pursuing revenue growth and performance metrics, **chains**, especially large transactions, are often used as a means to expand revenue.
Especially for state-owned enterprises, which have strong financial strength and easy access to credit, private small enterprises face challenges.
As a result, some state-owned enterprise chain companies may actually carry out lending operations in the name of ** due to performance pressure, which seems to improve short-term performance.
However, the shortcomings of risk control of state-owned enterprises may lead to the accumulation of risks of huge state-owned assets, and once the capital chain is broken, the consequences will be serious.
Therefore, the grey area of financing** must be treated with caution.
In recent years, state-owned enterprises have frequently experienced serious risk events in the field of financing, such as the 100 million yuan bankruptcy case of China Silk Group and the huge loss announcement of Shanghai Electric, which exposed problems such as idling and financing fraud.
In the face of strict regulation, the struggle between performance and compliance has become increasingly apparent for SOEs.
For example, although the transaction model between Anhui Huawen and Yunnan Huijia involves capital advances, the lawyer emphasized that capital advances are not equal to financing** and need to be analyzed on a case-by-case basis.
Guangzhou Yihai's legal liability as a warehousing party still needs to be adjudicated by law. The corruption behind these incidents has undoubtedly accelerated the loss of state-owned assets.
Nowadays, the policy of strictly prohibiting financing has made the state-owned enterprise chain face a dilemma, and how to find a balance between performance and compliance has become a key challenge.