[Direct answer]Generally, audit conclusions are not the sole basis for settlement. According to the "Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Legal Issues Applicable to the Trials of Disputes over Construction Contracts (I)", if the parties have agreed on the pricing standards or pricing methods for the construction project, the project price shall be settled in accordance with the agreed terms. Audit is an administrative supervision action of the state towards construction units. Unless the parties have explicitly agreed to use the audit conclusions as the basis for settlement, audit conclusions generally cannot replace the settlement basis agreed upon in the contract. That is to say, the settlement should first refer to the provisions of the contract, and then to the actual construction and change documents. Audit is just one possible reference. Action guidance: Check the pricing terms of the contract, organize the settlement and change documents, and do not delay the settlement indefinitely because of "waiting for the audit".

I. Problem background and typical scenarios

After the project is completed, the most common excuse that contractors encounter is "wait until the audit is finished to settle the payment". Typical scenarios include: government investment or state-owned capital projects that remain unpaid for a long time, leaving contractors struggling with a tight cash flow; or when the audit results in a large reduction in the project cost, the employer uses this as an excuse to refuse to pay the difference. The relationship between the audit and settlement directly affects whether contractors can receive their project payments on time.

II. Key points of contention

Firstly, the hierarchy of the effectiveness of the audit conclusion and the contractual provisions; Secondly, the circumstances under which the audit can be used as the basis for settlement; Thirdly, the impact of design changes and visa approvals on settlement; Fourthly, the responsibility of the employer for delaying the audit and settlement. The core point is: the contractual provisions take precedence, and the audit cannot delay the settlement indefinitely.

III. Professional analysis by Henglue Lawyers

The experience of Henglue in handling construction project cases is that settlement disputes should return to the two fundamentals of "agreement" and "evidence". Firstly, if the parties have agreed on the pricing standard or pricing method, the settlement shall be based on the agreed terms; this is the primary basis for settlement. Secondly, audit belongs to the scope of administrative supervision, and its purpose is to supervise the use of funds rather than to determine the civil rights and obligations of the contractors and clients. Only when the contract explicitly stipulates that the audit conclusion shall be the basis for settlement, will the audit results be binding on the settlement. Thirdly, design changes, increases or decreases in project quantities, visas and claim documents in the actual construction process often constitute adjustments to the original contract and are indispensable evidence for settlement. The contractors should systematically organize visa forms, change orders, meeting minutes and site records to form a complete settlement chain. In practice, there are two common disputes: Firstly, the client refuses to settle for a long time on the grounds of "unaudited", and the contractors can claim settlement according to the contract and legal provisions, and if necessary, seek payment of the project funds and interest through litigation; Secondly, after the audit reduction, the client refuses to pay, and the contractors should distinguish whether the basis for the reduction is reasonable. For unreasonable reductions, they should claim rights through appraisal or litigation. When the Beijing area court tries such cases, it usually determines the project price around the contractual provisions, visa changes and actual construction facts, and the audit conclusion is only one piece of evidence. It should be noted that the contract should try to clarify the settlement basis, settlement period and overdue liability as much as possible to avoid the ambiguity clause of "audit as the standard", otherwise it is easy to fall into a passive situation. The contractors should also pay attention to the simultaneous signing and approval of process materials to avoid the impact of retroactive signing on the probative force. 恒略处理建设工程案件的经验是，结算争议要回到“约定”和“证据”两个原点。首先，双方对计价标准或计价方法有约定的，按约定结算；这是结算的首要依据。其次，审计属于行政监督范畴，其目的是监督资金使用，而非确定发包方与承包方的民事权利义务；只有在合同中明确约定以审计结论作为结算依据时，审计结果才对结算具有约束力。再次，实际施工中的设计变更、工程量增减、签证与索赔文件，往往构成对原合同的调整，是结算不可忽视的依据；施工方应系统整理签证单、变更指令、会议纪要与现场记录，形成完整的结算链条。实务中，常见争议有二：一是发包方以 “未审计” 为由长期不结算，施工方可依据合同约定与法律规定主张按约结算，必要时通过诉讼要求支付工程款及利息；二是审计核减后发包方拒付，施工方应区分核减依据是否合理，对不合理的核减通过鉴定或诉讼主张权利。北京地区法院审理此类案件时，通常围绕合同约定、签证变更与实际施工事实认定工程价款，审计结论仅作为证据之一。需要提示的是，合同中应尽量明确结算依据、结算期限与逾期责任，避免出现 “以审计为准” 的模糊条款，否则容易陷入被动局面。施工方还应注重过程资料的同步签认，避免事后补签影响证明力。

IV. Practical Suggestions and Legal Basis

First, review the pricing and settlement terms in the contract to confirm whether it stipulates that the audit shall be the basis for settlement. Second, systematically organize the change orders, meeting minutes, and settlement materials to form a complete chain of evidence. Third, for any unjustified delay by the employer, send a written reminder and demand settlement in accordance with the contract. Fourth, if necessary, file a lawsuit to claim the project payment and interest, and request an appraisal of the unreasonable deduction application. Main legal basis: - The Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Legal Issues Applicable to the Trials of Construction Contract Disputes (effective January 1, 2021) - Provisions on Construction Contracts in the Contract Chapter of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China Specific application shall be subject to the currently effective laws, regulations, and judicial rulings.

5. Henglu Law Firm's Advice

Audit is not an excuse for delaying settlement. Contractual provisions take precedence, and changes to visas speak for themselves. If the other party delays settlement, you can legally assert your rights. For matters related to the settlement of construction projects, you can proceed through legal channels.Property sales and construction projectsObtain a comprehensive solution for the service; those involving contracts and commercial disputes can be combined togetherBusiness and contract disputes in enterprisesPlate; for reference, it involves the execution of project paymentsCreditor's rights and debts, and enforcementFor matters related to corporate law, please feel free to consult us.Intellectual property protection and corporate lawOther difficult issues can be resolved throughSpecial servicesDocking.

VI. Frequently Asked Questions

Q1: Do government projects necessarily have to wait for an audit before settling accounts?

Not necessarily. Audit is an administrative supervision. Unless the contract explicitly stipulates that the audit conclusion shall be used as the basis for settlement, it is generally not allowed to refuse to settle according to the contract on this basis. The contractor may claim settlement and payment according to the contract, and if the employer unreasonably delays the payment, the contractor may claim the project payment and interest according to law.

Q2: What evidence do I need to prepare for settlement disputes?

It is necessary to prepare the construction contract, bidding and quotation documents, visa forms and design change instructions, meeting minutes, payment records, completion and acceptance materials, and correspondence. The evidence should be able to reconstruct the actual scope of construction and the composition of the price.

Q3: How much does it cost to sue for project payments?

The litigation fees shall be paid in stages according to the amount of the subject matter; where the case involves project appraisal, additional appraisal fees shall be required. The attorney's fees shall be agreed upon based on the complexity of the dispute and the workload. It is recommended to first evaluate the basis for settlement and the reasonableness of the deduction, and then decide whether to proceed with appraisal and litigation.

Q4: How long does it usually take to litigate a construction payment dispute?

The ordinary procedure in the first instance generally lasts six months, and the summary procedure lasts three months; if the case involves the appraisal of project cost, the time will be significantly extended. Preparing the settlement materials in advance and narrowing the scope of disputes can help speed up the trial and appraisal process.

Q5: What should I do if the audit deduction is too high?

The basis and calculation process of the reduction should be reviewed, and objections should be raised against unreasonable parts and written records should be kept. If necessary, apply for project cost appraisal or initiate litigation, and the court will determine the facts based on the contract and actual construction. It is important not to wait passively after the reduction and not to assert rights.

The above answer is based on the judicial practice in Beijing. The adjudication standards in other provinces and cities may vary. For specific cases, please refer to the local rules and evidence situation.

If you are currently facing similar problems, it is recommended that you consult a professional lawyer as soon as possible with the necessary evidence to avoid missing the statutory time limit.Legal services for real estate transactions·Beijing Henglu Law Firm

Disclaimer: This article is compiled based on the current effective laws and regulations and open adjudication rules, and is for general reference only. It does not constitute a formal legal opinion on specific cases. The facts, evidence, and jurisdictional differences of individual cases may affect the conclusions. If a dispute arises, please consult a practicing lawyer in time.