BEIJING, October 14, 2022- S&P Global (China) Ratings has assigned its preliminary rating AAA_spc(sf) to Silver Arrow China Mercedes-Benz Leasing Co., Ltd. 2022-2 Asset Backed Notes (SABL 2022-2 ABN) Senior Notes to be issued by China Foreign Economy and Trade Trust. The transaction was originated by Mercedes-Benz Leasing Co. Ltd. (MBLC).

We assigned the preliminary ratings based on information as of August 23, 2022. We expect to assign and publish our final ratings when the trust becomes effective.

The preliminary ratings reflect our analysis of five pillars under S&P Ratings China--Structured Finance Methodology.

Credit Quality of the Securitized Assets: We analyzed the originator's operational framework, risk management and track record, historical static and dynamic pool data, aggregated and securitized assets, and other qualitative and quantitative factors to derive our base-case assumptions which are further refined by forward-looking considerations. We have formed a base-case assumption of a default rate (1.40%) and recovery rate (15.00%). After applying the stress multiple, recovery haircut as well as extra stress for final installments, return of leased vehicles and residual value loss caused by returned vehicles, the WA loss rate is 13.97% under our AAA_spc(sf) rating stress scenario. 

Payment Structure and Cash Flow Mechanics: We model various combinations under default timing assumptions, prepayment rate assumptions, different triggers and payment structures, tax, fees and expenses assumptions. The asset cash flows are expected to be able to withstand stresses commensurate with the ratings assigned to the notes, and still meet payment obligations in a timely manner. We estimated the final S&P Global (China) Ratings CE buffer to be greater than 1%. 

Operational and Administrative Risk: The direct debit payment mechanism will reduce MBLC’s operational risk to some extent. Although there is no back-up servicer, the general reserve can provide liquidity support to the transaction. We believe the participants in this transaction are capable of fulfilling the duties and responsibilities stipulated in the agreement given their experience and past track record.

Counterparty Risk: Our assessment of counterparty risk takes into account payment interruption risk, account bank risk, commingling risk etc. The transaction documents have incorporated various credit quality triggers to mitigate the abovementioned counterparty risk.

Legal and Regulatory Risk: We believe the legal structure of the special purpose trust (SPT) meets the principle of true sale and bankruptcy remoteness in securitization. This transaction is exposed to risk related to dispute over ownership and disposal of leased vehicles, as well as the originator’s bankruptcy risk. We believe the abovementioned risks have been mitigated by the existing arrangements stipulated in the transaction documents to some extent.  

List of Ratings:

Senior: AAA_spc(sf)

Methodology Applied:

S&P Ratings China--Structured Finance Methodology

Related Research:

Commentary: Understanding Our Approach to China Consumer Asset-Backed Securities

Pressure and Challenges Ahead | China Mid-Year Credit Quality Trends 2022

Models Applied:

SPG China Ratings Structured Finance Cash Flow Engine

Media Contacts:

Sharon Tang, Beijing, (86)10-6569-2988; sharon.tang@spgchinaratings.cn

Analyst Contacts:

Enjie Zhang, Beijing; enjie.zhang@spgchinaratings.cn

Siyue Zhu, Beijing; april.zhu@spgchinaratings.cn

Kaiyan Li, Beijing; kaye.li@spgchinaratings.cn

• 绿色金融的概念是动态发展的，其支持范围已从传统的环保产业活动扩展到传统高碳行业的低碳转型活动，并逐步形成了以可持续发展为核心的理念体系。在中国，绿色金融的支持范围随着国家对绿色金融目录的更新而持续调整。最新发布的《绿色金融支持项目目录（2025年版）》标志着绿色金融正朝着促进整个经济体系绿色转型的方向迈进。
• 中国、欧盟和美国在绿色金融政策体系上各具特色：欧盟强调法律先行、标准统一及强制信息披露要求，构建了全球范围内较为完善且具约束力的绿色金融监管与市场体系；中国的绿色金融政策体系主要依赖部门规章层级的政策性指导文件，这些文件的强制性弱于法律；而美国则更倾向于利用成熟的资本市场和强大的市场驱动力，但由于联邦层面缺乏一贯性和长期稳定性，导致整体政策连续性较弱。
• 国际主要绿色标准对比显示，欧盟在技术指标设定与评估流程设计上具有更高的规范性与精细化程度，相比之下，中国的绿色标准体系主要采用“正面清单”模式，旨在提升政策可操作性以扩大绿色金融市场，但在技术细节等方面不如欧盟标准详尽。国际通行标准则注重原则导向与灵活性，为不同司法管辖区的制度适配提供较大空间。
• 中国绿色金融政策体系在深化过程中仍面临多重挑战：与国际标准的一致性不足、ESG信息披露的强制性和覆盖面不足，以及现行机制偏向追求短期规模扩张而非长期绿色项目的效益评估。

• 预计2025年全国商品房销售压力仍存。高线城市继续支撑市场，但结构上仍面临二手房分流、库存分化明显的矛盾。稳住楼市仍有赖于政策的持续发力，城中村改造货币化安置及回储政策或将是政策发力的重点。
• 受益于债务置换及专项债券用途扩展，城投企业流动性压力缓解，短期内出现债券信用风险事件的概率较低，但基本面难以显著改善。长期关注中央债务化解新增政策和城投转型成效。
• 与房地产行业紧密相关联的钢铁和建筑工程施工行业将基本延续需求疲软趋势。其中钢铁行业“反内卷”和成本回落或有助于利润修复，但财务杠杆仍将维持高位；建筑工程施工行业利润率将在低位保持稳定。
• 火电、风电设备和光伏制造行业的企业盈利能力或将改善，煤炭、清洁能源发电、整车制造以及商业物业持有及运营行业的企业利润率或将有所下降，杠杆率将有所上升。
• 商业银行净息差继续收窄，信用成本依然承压，行业总体盈利性较2024年会有小幅下降，但信用质量仍然能保持稳定，未来12个月高风险银行违约风险可控。

• 财政部年内两次通报隐性债务问责案例，反映出地方化债形势依然严峻，中央政府监管依然 较为严格。
• 7月30日召开的中共中央政治局会议重申加强地方债务风险防控，明确“有力有序有效推进 地方融资平台出清”。我们认为，政策意在剥离城投企业的政府融资职能，而非否定其主体 价值；未来，城投公司仍可通过市场化转型继续实现发展。
• 近年来，中央政府采取力度空前的政策措施，全力支持地方政府化解隐性债务，但今年审计 署披露的违规举债情况表明，部分地区在化解隐性债务方面仍需改进和加强。在此背景下， 中央持续释放对违规融资“零容忍”的强烈信号，以防范地方政府可能出现的道德风险。