China's Chery denies improper subsidy declarations
A government audit disqualified declarations by Chinese carmakers Chery and BYD for a combined S$67.8 million in government subsidies.
SHANGHAI - Chinese automaker Chery on July 12 denied assertions that it had improperly claimed government subsidies for environmentally friendly vehicles.
An audit by the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology
disqualified declarations by Chery and BYD for a combined US$53 million (S$67.8 million) in government subsidies for thousands of vehicles sold in the five years to 2020, accounting for nearly 60 per cent of such improper claims.
Chery denied its declarations were improper.
It said in a statement it had previously consulted the authorities about the challenges of missing receipts because the cars were sold more than five years ago and that the government had advised the company to declare the cars for the ministry to determine if they should be qualified.
'Our company has truthfully reported to the authorities we did not collect certificates for end sales; there's no fraudulent act,' Chery said in the statement.
The government's assertions do not include allegations of fraud.
EV maker BYD did not respond to requests for comment.
Top stories
Swipe. Select. Stay informed.
Asia Air India crash report shows pilot confusion over engine switch movement
Singapore More NSFs may be recruited to tackle scams: Police
Singapore $3 cashback for hawker centre meals and shopping at heartland stores with DBS PayLah initiative
Singapore 40% more sign-ups to programmes for adult learners at institutes of higher learning in last 5 years
Singapore Exhibition marking The Straits Times' 180th anniversary opens on July 12 at Jewel Changi
Multimedia Which floor is this? Chongqing's maze-like environment powers its rise as a megacity
Singapore Over 20 motorists caught offering illegal ride-hailing services at Changi Airport and Gardens by the Bay
Life SG60 F&B icons: 20 dishes and drinks which have shaped Singaporeans' taste buds
The audit, initiated earlier this year to verify subsidy applications over the five-year period, disqualified 21,725 vehicles for subsidies as it found discrepancies such as failure to submit required supporting documents or to meet the mandated mileage thresholds, according to the documents published by the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology in June.
Chery had 7,663 vehicles disqualified - 19 for mileage thresholds and 7,643 for not providing certificates.
The audit documents did not lay out any penalties or mention reimbursement.
The government has previously said automakers will have to repay subsidies for vehicles found not to have met mileage requirements.
Chery said the audit covered declarations for subsidies that were not prepaid and thus automakers did not need to repay. REUTERS
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Times
44 minutes ago
- Business Times
China biotech's stunning advance is changing the world's drug pipeline
[HONG KONG] The biotechnology industry is experiencing a tectonic shift, driven by Chinese drugmakers who have come a long way from their copycat days to challenge Western dominance on innovation. The number of novel drugs in China, for cancer, weight-loss and more, entering into development ballooned to over 1,250 last year, far surpassing the European Union and nearly catching up to the US's count of about 1,440, an exclusive Bloomberg News analysis showed. And the drug candidates from the land once notorious for cheap knock-offs and quality issues are increasingly clearing high bars to win recognition from both drug regulators and Western pharmaceutical giants. The findings, gleaned from an analysis of a database maintained by pharma intelligence solutions provider Norstella, show a fundamental shift in medical innovation's centre of gravity. With US President Donald Trump already threatening tariffs on the pharmaceutical sector, China's biotech advances, the scale of which is slowly coming into view, risk becoming another realm of superpower rivalry such as artificial intelligence and electric vehicles. 'The scale itself is not something we have seen before,' said Helen Chen, managing partner at LEK Consulting in Shanghai, who has advised healthcare companies on their China strategy since 2003. 'The products are here, they are attractive and they are fast.' This shift has occurred at an unprecedented pace. When China began to overhaul its drug regulatory system in 2015, the country had just 160 compounds to contribute to the global pipeline of innovative drugs, or less than 6 per cent of the total, behind Japan and the UK. The reforms helped streamline reviews, enforced data quality standards and improved transparency. BT in your inbox Start and end each day with the latest news stories and analyses delivered straight to your inbox. Sign Up Sign Up The government's 'Made in China 2025' plan to elevate manufacturing in 10 priority sectors also helped spur a flurry of investments in biotechnology. Altogether, they unleashed a boom led by foreign-educated and -trained scientists and entrepreneurs. 'Not only is it now almost at parity with the US but it has that growth trajectory,' said Daniel Chancellor, vice-president of thought leadership at Norstella. 'It wouldn't be sensationalist to suggest that China will overtake the US in the next few years purely in terms of numbers of drugs that it's bringing through into its pipeline.' Bloomberg News' data analysis focuses on innovative drugs, excluding generic combinations, reformulations and biosimilars. Numbers aside, the more stunning leap is in the quality of Chinese biotech innovation. While there's constant debate in the pharmaceutical industry on whether Chinese firms are capable of producing not just effective but needle-shifting new therapies, there's growing recognition on multiple fronts. The world's strictest regulatory agencies, including the US Food and Drug Administration and the European Medicines Agency, increasingly view Chinese drugs as generally promising enough to justify devoting extra resources to speed up their review, handing them coveted industry designations such as priority review, breakthrough therapy designation or fast track status. The country is now slightly ahead of the EU in earning such expedited reviews as of 2024, the data shows, a remarkable edge over a region that previously produced drugs such as Wegovy. One of the early exemplars of Chinese innovation is a cell therapy that has shown promise to potentially cure a deadly blood cancer. First developed in China by Legend Biotech, it is now marketed by Johnson & Johnson, having won a few expedited review designations along the way, and considered superior to a competing US-originated therapy. Still, the absolute number of China-originated drugs winning these designations trail their US counterparts by a large margin. Risk-aversion remains a factor holding back Chinese pharmaceutical innovation: So far, top companies tend to focus on making better versions of existing therapies or new iterations of older ideas, and few are pioneering novel treatment approaches that have never been tried before, an endeavour that comes with a high risk of failure and is still led by the US, Europe and, to a lesser extent, Japan. Nevertheless, the biggest Chinese breakthroughs are increasingly being snapped up by pharmaceutical giants for record sums, a sign that the perennial competition for the next blockbuster drug is also shifting East. A novel cancer drug from Akeso, which came out more effective than Merck's Keytruda in a Chinese study last year, has been likened to China biotech's DeepSeek moment, spawning a new wave of global interest. The promise of topping Keytruda, the world's top-selling drug, also swelled the valuation of Summit Therapeutics, which in 2022 paid US$500 million upfront for the development and marketing rights in the US and other regions. Other multinational players such as Merck, AstraZeneca and Roche Holding have also scooped up Chinese assets. In May, Pfizer set a new record as it announced a US$1.2 billion upfront deal with 3SBio for a cancer drug similar to Akeso's. These deals are increasing in both value and frequency, according to biopharma deal database DealForma, signalling confidence that China-originated drugs are competitive internationally and can bring in substantial revenue. The volume of potential candidates coming out of China means multinational companies, who have a constant need to add new products to the mix, can 'cast their net wider than ever before', Norstella's Chancellor said. A key advantage that has fuelled the rise of Chinese biotech firms is their ability to conduct research cheaper and faster at every step of the way, from lab experiments and animal testing to human trials. Creating a new drug from scratch is notoriously time-consuming and expensive, and China's massive patient pool and centralised hospital network have become a significant accelerator. An analysis of the time taken for drugs to conduct various testing stages shows that doctors in China can recruit for trials much faster, for early trials for cancer and obesity drugs, they can complete patient enrolment in half the time compared to the US. The difference in costs means Chinese companies can afford to run multiple trials simultaneously to find a winner, or quickly launch new projects once a scientific idea is validated by other groups. Since 2021, China has become the top location for clinical research, initiating the largest number of new trials globally, according to GlobalData. 'They can leapfrog competitors in other countries,' said Andy Liu, head of China at Novotech Health Holdings, which helps companies run clinical trials. To be sure, clinical data in China is just a start. US regulators have made it clear that China-only trial results, no matter how positive, are not sufficient to support drug approvals. Chinese biotechs with the ambition to sell their drugs overseas must prove that their treatment benefits can be replicated in non-Chinese patients, through complex and slower-moving global studies. It may still be a few years before a critical mass of drugs sourced from China wins US and EU approvals, the gold standard for high-quality treatments, and become widely used in the Western world, but many in the industry believe that's inevitable. China's innovators comprise both cutting-edge biotech startups founded by foreign-educated entrepreneurs and old-guard Chinese pharmaceutical companies such as Jiangsu Hengrui Pharmaceuticals, which used to be one of the country's biggest generic drugmakers. The company poured billions of US dollars into shifting to innovative research and development after Beijing's campaign to lower generic drug prices made that sector less profitable. It's now the world's top-ranked pharmaceutical company for the number of new innovative drugs added to the research pipeline in the period of 2020 to 2024. Of the 50 companies that generated the highest number of innovative drug candidates between 2020 and 2024, 20 of them were Chinese, compared to five in the five years before. 'As we move forward, the fact that there's high-quality innovation in China in terms of biotech will no longer be a novelty,' said Ali Pashazadeh, founder and managing director of healthcare advisory firm Treehill Partners in London. 'It will just be an accepted part of the norm.' At a time when China and the US are engaged in renewed geopolitical spats, the growth of China's biotech ecosystem is causing alarm among some American politicians and business leaders. A congressional commission warned that the US risks losing its leadership position in yet another industry critical to national security. 'Biotech is one of the forefronts of the US-China tech rivalry,' said Jack Burnham, research analyst at the think tank Foundation for Defense of Democracies. In addition to economic implications and possible military applications of biotech, China's leverage on innovative therapies may be weaponised in a future conflict, he said, if Americans become dependent on those medicines. The perception of threat has spurred calls for the US government to stymie China's biotech growth, through restrictions such as export controls on scientific equipment and barriers to investment, and boost the domestic biotech sector, including by changing the regulatory environment to emulate countries where clinical trials are run more quickly. Robert F Kennedy, the US Secretary of Health and Human Services, recently pledged to 'Make American Biotech Accelerate'. Despite the risks of the newly combative relationship between the world's two biggest economies, Chinese drugmakers such as Akeso have set their sights on bringing their therapies to developed Western markets. 'The pharma industry is the best industry in the world,' Akeso chief executive officer Michelle Xia said. 'At the end of the day, what we do benefits patients in China, in the US and all around the world.' BLOOMBERG
CNA
an hour ago
- CNA
US senators aim to arm Trump with 'sledgehammer' sanctions against Russia
WASHINGTON: US senators on Sunday (Jul 13) touted a bipartisan Bill that would arm President Donald Trump with "sledgehammer" sanctions to use against Russia, ahead of a visit by the US special envoy to Ukraine. Trump has indicated he would be open to the sanctions Bill as relations with Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin grow increasingly frosty. US special envoy Keith Kellogg is due to begin his latest visit to Ukraine while Trump said he would make a "major statement ... on Russia" on Monday. Republican Senator Lindsey Graham said he had majority backing in the Senate for his Bill, which was gaining momentum as Washington-led peace efforts in Ukraine have struggled to make headway. The Bill would allow Trump "to go after Putin's economy, and all those countries who prop up the Putin war machine", Graham told broadcaster CBS News. Trump, who has repeatedly said he is "disappointed" with Putin as Moscow unleashed deadly barrages of missiles against Kyiv, has hinted he might finally be ready to toughen sanctions. Trump held off for the past six months while he tried to persuade Putin to end the war. But the Republican president's patience appears to be wearing thin, telling reporters during a Cabinet meeting at the White House Tuesday that Putin was talking "a lot of bullshit" on Ukraine. Last week, Trump also agreed to send Zelenskyy more weapons, including through a deal with NATO, which would involve the alliance purchasing US weapons to send to Ukraine. On Thursday, Trump appeared to back the Bill without detailing whether he would use it to slap sanctions on Moscow. "They're going to pass a very major and very biting sanctions Bill, but it's up to the president as to whether or not he wants to exercise it," Trump told broadcaster NBC. Asked during a Cabinet meeting about his interest in the Bill, Trump said: "I'm looking at it very strongly." "This congressional package that we're looking at would give President Trump the ability to impose 500 per cent tariffs on any country that helps Russia," said Graham, adding that those could include economies that purchase Russian goods like China, India or Brazil. "This is truly a sledgehammer available to President Trump to end this war," said Graham. "Without a doubt, this is exactly the kind of leverage that can bring peace closer and make sure diplomacy is not empty," the Ukrainian leader said about the proposed bill in an X post. Graham and Democratic Senator Richard Blumenthal were to meet NATO secretary-general Mark Rutte on Monday night. Blumenthal told CBS News they would also discuss the legally thorny issue of unlocking frozen Russian assets in Europe and the United States for access by Ukraine.
Business Times
2 hours ago
- Business Times
Grasping the mettle of geopolitics in portfolios
[SINGAPORE] Geopolitical crises and conflicts are springing up with greater frequency; do they warrant action on your portfolio? How should you approach geopolitical risk, if at all? US-China tensions have simmered for years, but US President Donald Trump's tariff salvos against the world have further exacerbated the strains – and not just vis-a-vis China. Some issues may seem to have a straightforward impact on economies and markets. In a tariff-ridden world, for instance, higher-for-longer inflation seems par for the course. Some themes may jump out when war erupts such as higher oil prices and more defence spending. But is it as simple – and reactive – as that? For institutions – and certainly global corporates – which seek to take a longer, forward-looking view, taking geopolitics into account is increasingly seen as crucial for decision-making. A 2025 survey of chief executives by the New York Stock Exchange and Oliver Wyman Forum found that concern over geopolitical risk has surged. Almost 90 per cent of CEOs rated geopolitics, trade policies, tariffs, and industrial policy as a risk to their company, up 20 percentage points from 2024. 'The 'geopolitics-first' approach to business strategy is no longer optional; it's a prerequisite for business outperformance in a new world in which politics drives markets,' Oliver Wyman Forum noted in a paper. JPMorganChase launched a centre for geopolitics recently to advise clients on how to anticipate and respond to the top geopolitical trends including the rise of artificial intelligence (AI). In its inaugural report, chief executive Jamie Dimon wrote that the world is at a 'hinge point' in history. 'Our greatest risk is geopolitical risk. This moment demands clarity, agility, and foresight,' he wrote. BT in your inbox Start and end each day with the latest news stories and analyses delivered straight to your inbox. Sign Up Sign Up Geopolitics driving 'the great diversification' Amundi, with more than 2.2 trillion euros (S$3.3 trillion) under management, hired a geopolitical strategist in 2022, said Monica Defend, head of Amundi Investment Institute, to enhance its approach to asset allocation. She spoke to The Business Times on the sidelines of Amundi's World Investment Forum in Paris. Amundi seeks to be 'more scientific' in its approach to geopolitics, says Monica Defend, head of Amundi Investment Institute. Its Geopolitical Sentiment Tracker alerts investors to rising risks. PHOTO: AMUNDI Defend said: 'We've experienced crisis after crisis, and the pandemic was a shock that induced a paradigm shift. We recognised that some things became national security issues when we were short of some goods, and this started the global supply chain relocation. 'The new US administration has accelerated this further. We're moving to a polarised way of arranging deals. We've been looking at the potential winners of this new trend – the emerging markets... Asia and Latin America are emerging as new routes for supply chains. This is also creating a new super trend for commodities. 'Geopolitics is exacerbating the movements, whether it's energy transition or trade agreements. We used to focus on economic stability as a component in assessing the economic backdrop of a country. But we want to be more scientific.' Amundi's first initiative was to design a Geopolitical Sentiment Tracker to alert investors to rising risks, said Defend. 'The second thing is to see is if there is some connection between the geopolitical tracker and financial regimes. For us, the assessment of the financial regime is the first step towards asset allocation.' Amundi developed a tool using variables relating to growth, inflation, monetary policy and financial leverage. Five financial regimes or phases – correction, contraction, recovery, late cycle and asset reflation – are found to have persisted. 'The geopolitical evidence helps us to screen asset classes, such as oil, US dollar and gold. We want to be as disciplined as we can in the way we navigate the geopolitical environment, to help us decide what asset classes we want to be on or off, and how to hedge the risk.' The bottom line, based on a paper by Anna Rosenberg, Amundi Investment Institute's head of geopolitics, is the unfolding of what she calls 'The Great Diversification' currently underway. This is evident in a few aspects: The US dollar's share of global reserves is expected to decline from around 58 per cent currently to 55 per cent over the next decade, while the renminbi's share is likely to exceed 5 per cent. Demand for eurozone bonds is rising, and European assets are attracting more capital flows. Gold is at all-time highs. Rosenberg wrote: 'Politics will continue to hit global investors where they are most exposed – in US assets… Winners and losers will not be clear until tariff negotiations and the re-routing process are completed, but Europe is likely to remain a net winner from US uncertainty. 'While political risks remain, Europe is growing more united, as leaders understand they are stronger together than as individual member states… There is momentum towards single and financial market integration and creating an environment that could make the euro more attractive.' A multipolar world: negative for US dollar Marko Papic, BCA Research's chief strategist for 'geomacro', a framework which combines geopolitics and markets, noted in a paper that global asset allocators are scrambling to incorporate geopolitics into strategic asset allocations. But they made the mistake of treating geopolitics as 'exogenous' to the portfolio – that is, as a series of external shocks fundamentally different from the core anchors of valuation, growth and inflation. 'There is nothing exogenous about geopolitics. It is very much endogenous to the macroeconomic and financial assumptions that define the strategic asset allocation,' he wrote. It is a mistake to take the approach of anticipating the future 'end state', he wrote, but instead, 'global allocators need to consider the transition away from American unipolarity'. Until now, most investors have been accustomed to thinking of the world as 'unipolar' with low levels of geopolitical volatility, and where the US has served as the consumer of last resort and the magnet for capital flows. But this is ending, as evidenced in the frequency of armed conflict and rise in defence spending. Together with BCA's global asset allocation team, the geomacro team has created an approach linking geopolitical regimes and asset prices, 'using trade and capital flows as a bridge'. 'The next five to 10 years will be a decade of transition, during which the world will see the global macro imbalances shift.' He posits two multipolar scenarios as most likely – balanced and unbalanced – with negative implications for the US dollar. In either scenario, US assets are expected to underperform due to US dollar devaluation. Both scenarios are positive for the commodities cycle. Asset allocation approaches Meanwhile, the Bank of Singapore (BOS) has rolled out a 'robust optimisation' (RO) technique for strategic asset allocation, which it says is a first for an Asian private bank. The RO aims to help clients build more resilient portfolios at a time of more frequent spikes in volatility and asset correlations. The system, said BOS, does not directly incorporate geopolitics. 'Geopolitics is very hard to quantify. But they still have real effects on the economy. Growing geo-economic fragmentation can disrupt global trade and cause supply shortages, leading to inflation and slower economic growth. We factor these in when making capital market assumptions around expected returns.' With the RO technique, the result is a far more diversified portfolio – with lower exposure to US equities, for instance – that reduces risk and focuses on minimising the potential loss in the worst-case scenario. The approach, however, may sacrifice some market return in favour of resilience. DBS chief investment officer Hou Wey Fook said geopolitical tensions have long-term implications for portfolios, particularly through a sustained increase in infrastructure and defence spending. The bank highlighted these in its latest market insight publication. In its asset allocation framework, DBS assesses the impact of key macro drivers on three dimensions – fundamentals, valuation and momentum. For geopolitical risk, the 'first order impact' is short-term volatility, reflected in the momentum factor. 'The second-order effects, such as changes to earnings expectations or inflation, will be captured under fundamentals.'
