摘要
摘要
在前期我国经济高速发展时，部分企业依靠负债杠杆经营取得一定成绩，
但随着我国经济增速降低，市场环境复杂多变，多数企业面临转型升级困难，
高杠杆经营使得公司债务风险提高，整体财务风险不断加大。国家 2016年印发
《关于积极稳妥降低企业杠杆率的意见》、2019年相关部委下发《2019年降低
企业杠杆率工作要点》，确定了包含推动市场化债转股、推进战略重组、加快
“僵尸企业”出清等 21项任务清单和完成时间表。在这份任务清单中，大多数
完成时间都标为持续推进，这说明我国国有企业去杠杆工作需要持续推进。
电力行业属于资本密集型的重资产行业，在前期就需要投入大量资金建设，
普遍采用银行借款的债务融资模式，故杠杆率普遍较高。2018年年末，五个央
企发电集团中有四个资产负债率在 77%附近，部分下属公司负债率已经超过
100%，资不抵债。过高的资产负债率已经威胁到了我国电力行业发展的安全,因
此，采取积极稳妥的措施降低负债规模，保证企业平稳发展就显得尤为重要。
本论文在阐述去杠杆的研究背景及意义的基础上，对国内外去杠杆的动因、
对策及实施效果进行梳理，结合相关理论，以 M公司为研究对象，运用案例分
析法、文献研究法等对 M公司去杠杆的动因进行分析，发现 M公司去杠杆是由
于其采取高杠杆举债发展导致负债规模庞大、现金流不足，加之国家供给侧改
革、M省经济增长减缓、政策变化等因素导致。为化解高债务风险， M公司采
取“债转股”、应收账款资产支持证券、剥离不良资产三种措施来降低公司杠
杆。通过对其采取去杠杆措施后的实施效果进行定量分析，发现其采取的债转
股措施存在较大的风险，对其存在的不足进行原因分析,并给出相应优化措施。
研究结果表明：M公司采取的去杠杆措施在短期内降低了财务杠杆，但是，名
股实债的债转股措施并未从根本上降低企业的财务风险，相反由于其属于夹层
资本，资本成本必然高于债务成本，低于股权成本，利息抵税效益被弱化，提
高了公司的融资成本，可能会增加企业的财务风险。因此，在选择去杠杆对策
时，应基于长远利益，利用自身优势，选择合适的去杠杆措施来降低财务风险。
关键词：电力行业；去杠杆；动因；对策措施；效果分析
I

Abstract
Abstract
In the early stage of China's rapid economic development, some enterprises
made some achievements by relying on debt leverage. However, as China's economic
growth slows down and the market environment is complex and changeable, most
enterprises face difficulties in transformation and upgrading. High leverage operation
makes the debt risk of the company increase, and the overall financial risk keeps
increasing. In 2016, The State Council issued the Opinions on Actively yet Prudently
Lowering The Corporate Leverage Ratio, and in 2019, relevant ministries and
commissions issued the Main Points of Work on Lowering the Corporate Leverage
Ratio in 2019, setting out a 21-task list and completion schedule, including promoting
market-oriented debt-equity swaps, promoting strategic restructuring and speeding up
the liquidation of "zombie enterprises". In the task list, most of the completion time is
marked as continuous progress, indicating that the deleveraging of China's soes needs
continuous progress.
The power industry is a capital-intensive and asset-heavy industry. During the
construction period, a large amount of capital needs to be invested in construction.
The debt financing model of bank loans is generally used for financing, so the
leverage ratio is generally high. At the end of 2018, four of the five centrally-owned
power generation groups had an asset-liability ratio near 77%, and some of the
subordinate companies' debt ratios had exceeded 100%, making them insolvent.
Excessive asset-liability ratio has threatened the safety of the development of my
country's power industry. Therefore, it is particularly important to take active and
prudent measures to reduce the scale of liabilities and ensure the stable development
of enterprises.
On the basis of elaborating the research background and significance of
deleveraging, this paper sorts out the motivations, countermeasures and
implementation effects of deleveraging at home and abroad, combines relevant
theories, takes M company as the research object, and uses case analysis methods,
literature research methods, etc. An analysis of the motivation of M company's
II

Abstract
deleveraging, it is found that M company's deleveraging is due to its large scale of
liabilities and insufficient cash flow due to its high-leverage development, coupled
with the national supply-side reform, the slowdown of economic growth in M
province, policy changes and other factors. In order to resolve the high debt risk,
Company M adopted three measures to reduce the company's leverage:
"debt-to-equity swap", accounts receivable asset-backed securities, and stripping of
non-performing assets. Through quantitative analysis of the implementation effect of
its deleveraging measures, it is found that the debt-to-equity swap measures taken by
it have greater risks, and the reasons for its shortcomings are analyzed, and
corresponding optimization measures are given. The results of the study show that the
deleveraging measures taken by M Company reduced financial leverage in the short
term. However, the debt-to-equity swap of name-equity and real-debt does not
fundamentally reduce the financial risk of the company. On the contrary, because it
belongs to mezzanine capital, the cost of capital must be higher than the cost of debt
and lower than the cost of equity, and the benefit of interest tax deduction is
weakened and increased. The company's financing costs may increase the company's
financial risk. Therefore, when choosing deleveraging countermeasures, we should
take advantage of our own advantages and choose appropriate deleveraging measures
to reduce financial risks based on long-term interests.
Key words：Power industry; Deleveraging; Motivation; Countermeasures;
Effect analysis
III
。。。以下略