Recently, the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology released the "Announcement on the Average Fuel Consumption and New Energy Vehicle Points of Passenger Car Companies in 2019", which announced the new energy vehicle points of 119 domestic passenger car manufacturers and 27 imported passenger car suppliers.

Condition.

?Among them, domestic passenger car manufacturers have produced a total of 20.0085 million passenger cars, the actual average fuel consumption is 5.73 liters/100 kilometers, the positive fuel consumption points are 6.0743 million points, and the negative fuel consumption points are 4.5708 million points, new

Energy vehicle points are 3.0241 million points.

Looking at specific car companies, among the 119 domestic passenger car manufacturers, 70 companies have obtained positive new energy vehicle points, accounting for 58.82%, 19 companies have 0 new energy vehicle points, and the remaining 30 companies have obtained new energy vehicle points.

is negative.

The top three positive average fuel consumption points of passenger car manufacturers in 2019 are BYD Auto with 895,075 points, BYD Automobile Industry with 750,522 points, and BAIC Motor with 582,716 points. The top ten are also SAIC, JAC, and GAC Passenger Vehicles.

Yongche, Dongfeng Motor, Tianjin FAW Toyota, BMW Brilliance, and Beijing New Energy.

The top three passenger car companies in terms of positive new energy vehicle points are BYD Auto with 478,587 points, BAIC Motor with 448,415 points, and BYD Industrial with 406,974 points. The top ten are also Jianghuai Automobile, Beijing New Energy, GAC Passenger Vehicle, and SAIC Motor.

, Dongfeng Motor Group, Zhejiang Haoqing and Chongqing Changan.

The top ten companies with negative average fuel consumption points for passenger cars are FAW-Volkswagen, SAIC-GM, Beijing Hyundai, Beijing Benz, Dongfeng Co., Ltd., Dongfeng Xiaokang, SAIC Volkswagen, SAIC-GM-Wuling, Sichuan FAW Toyota, and GAC Mitsubishi.

The top ten passenger car companies with negative points for new energy vehicles are FAW-Volkswagen, SAIC Volkswagen, GAC Honda, Beijing Benz, Beijing Hyundai, Dongfeng Honda, Dongfeng Co., Ltd., SAIC-GM, Tianjin FAW Toyota, and GAC Toyota.

27 imported passenger car supply companies imported 922,600 passenger cars. The actual average fuel consumption was 6.96 liters/100 kilometers. The positive fuel consumption points were 388,000 points. The negative fuel consumption points were 600,500 points. New energy vehicles

The points are 247,800 points.

Among them, among the imported new energy vehicle points for passenger cars, 6 companies received positive points, 16 companies received 0 points, and 5 companies received negative points.

Tesla tops the list with 271,282 new energy vehicle points. The six companies with positive points include FAW Group Import and Export, Porsche (China), Volkswagen (China), Chrysler (China), Volvo Car Sales (

Shanghai).

The top seven passenger car companies with negative fuel consumption points are Mercedes-Benz (China), Ford Motor (China), BMW (China), Jaguar Land Rover (China), Toyota Motor (China), and Volkswagen (China)

, Subaru Automobile (China).

Overall, in 2019, Chinese passenger car companies achieved positive fuel consumption points of 6.0743 million points and negative points of 4.57 million points. The difference was 1.5035 million points, with positive points remaining.

According to the dual-point management method, the negative fuel consumption points of car companies must be offset and reset to zero within 90 days after the competent authorities officially publish the points report (the official report is usually released before June 30).

Chinese passenger car companies have positive new energy points of 3.83 million points and negative points of 806,900 points.

This is the first time that new energy vehicles have negative points. According to the previously released standards, starting from 2019, all passenger car companies will begin to implement new energy vehicle points requirements, with a proportion of 10%; in 2020, the proportion of points will be 12%.

According to the dual point management method, in addition to the postponement of compensation from 2019 to 2020, it must also be reset to zero in the same year.

In 2019, the new energy vehicle points difference was 3.0241 million points, with a large amount of positive points remaining.

For car companies with a large number of negative average fuel consumption points, the compensation method can use the positive average fuel consumption points carried forward by the company, the positive average fuel consumption points transferred by the company, and the use of positive average fuel consumption points generated by the company.

There are several ways to obtain positive points for new energy vehicles and positive points for purchasing new energy vehicles. However, judging from the double points announced this time, the number of negative points for corporate average fuel consumption is larger. The number of positive points for new energy vehicles of car companies is generally also

is negative, and only two are positive. It is definitely not enough to offset the negative points for fuel consumption. A more feasible way is to seek transfer from affiliated companies. For example, Mercedes-Benz can seek positive points from BAIC Motor and BAIC New Energy to offset them.

The dual-points policy was revised several times in 2019 and solicited opinions, but the new dual-points policy has not yet been released.

Faced with the surplus of positive points, the effect of the double-point policy is obviously somewhat ineffective. I wonder whether the relevant departments will further tighten the double-point policy.

On the other hand, for large players with negative points, seeking affiliated companies can only temporarily alleviate the pain point of lagging new energy development. Faced with the situation that the higher the sales volume, the more negative points, it is still necessary to transform to electrification as soon as possible to make up for the shortcomings.

This article comes from the author of Autohome Chejiahao and does not represent the views and positions of Autohome.