TrueEV says it invested more than $60 million launching XPENG in Australia under a five-year distribution deal. Now the manufacturer is asking a court to wind up three TrueEV companies. Between those events, receivers were appointed over about 197 vehicles, and a Federal Court lawsuit ended without trial.
On 1 October 2026, XPENG Motors Australia Pty Ltd and two Chinese XPENG companies applied to the NSW Supreme Court to wind up True EV Pty Ltd (ACN 670 677 255), True EV Retail Pty Ltd (ACN 677 256 012) and True EV Distribution Pty Ltd (ACN 675 726 191). ASIC published the applications on 26 October. All three hearings are listed for 9am on 4 November. The notices do not state what each company allegedly owes.
The name creates a trap. True EV Retail was formerly called XPENG AUSTRALIA PTY LTD and still holds the business name “Xpeng Australia”. The manufacturer’s present Australian subsidiary, XPENG Motors Australia Pty Ltd (ACN 683 035 467), is a different company, registered in December 2024.
Is TrueEV in liquidation? No. These are applications, and the court has made no order. An application is not a finding that a company is insolvent. True EV Distribution has had receivers over some of its assets since 19 March 2026, which is a separate process started by a lender.
Legal company | Why it matters |
|---|---|
True EV Retail Pty Ltd | Formerly XPENG AUSTRALIA PTY LTD; holds “Xpeng Australia”; winding-up application |
True EV Distribution Pty Ltd | Distributor in Federal Court case; receivership over vehicle stock; winding-up application |
XPENG Motors Australia Pty Ltd | Manufacturer-backed Australian operation; an applicant, not a respondent |
I own an XPENG. Who stands behind the car? In July, XPENG Australia said customers who bought through TrueEV would get service, repairs and warranty work through its own dealer network, and that it was paying eligible cashback claims case by case. Who is legally responsible under a particular sales contract depends on who sold the car. Separately, the carmaker holds both XPENG type approvals in force, for the G6 and the X9, and owns the XPENG trade marks. Those are regulatory and brand rights, not a promise about any individual sale.
Get the Full Register
On each ASIC publication day, get the legal company names, registered trading names, appointments and court dates behind the notices. Choose Full Register, Weekly Brief or investigation updates on the next screen.
The five-year plan — and the six shipments
XPENG and TrueEV signed a distributor agreement on 14 May 2024. It made TrueEV the exclusive Australian distributor of XPENG vehicles for at least five years.
The terms put the up-front payment on the importer. TrueEV had annual targets for the number of vehicles it would order from XPENG. It had to pay part of each order within 15 business days and secure the balance with a letter of credit or similar instrument.
In its account of the dispute, TrueEV says it invested more than $60 million, generated about 3,000 customer orders, engaged Deloitte Automotive and Ultra Tune, and signed franchise agreements with Autopact and Autoleague. These are the distributor’s claims, not audited turnover, profits, losses or a finding of debt. Orders are not necessarily completed sales.
The court record gives the order book. Between August 2024 and March 2025, there were six shipments or proposed shipments of vehicles from XPENG to TrueEV. There was one more contract, in February 2026, for an order placed the previous October, and TrueEV did not pay for it.
One brand, different rights and liabilities
The arrangement split the business in two.
The federal vehicle type-approval register lists the G6 and X9 approvals to Chinese manufacturer Guangzhou Xiaopeng Motors Technology Co Ltd. IP Australia records XPENG marks to that company too; six model-mark applications followed between April and July 2026. These records identify regulatory and trade mark holders, not who must honour a particular dealer contract or warranty. Distribution rights depend on the commercial agreement.
TrueEV developed dealer relationships, customer commitments and local stock arrangements, some supported by trade finance. The Federal Court identifies Helios in connection with that financing. Receivers were appointed in March over about 197 vehicles. Neither the current inventory nor the amount recovered has been established.
The approval-holder split is not unique to XPENG. Among the sampled records, BYD, Zeekr, GWM and Chery generally have approvals held by manufacturer-related companies, sometimes alongside local modifiers; Leapmotor has approvals held by Stellantis’s Australian company. These arrangements differ commercially. The approvals establish who holds the vehicle-type permission, not who is entitled to sell or must support a vehicle under a particular contract. For TrueEV, the difference between regulatory holder and contractual counterparty matters because the companies facing winding-up are not the manufacturer.
On 4 November, XPENG asks the court to wind up three TrueEV companies.
How it came apart
The relationship had been under strain for most of a year before it reached court.
During 2025, XPENG issued notices of breach, including one on 11 April 2025 over vehicles sold through dealers it had not approved, and proposed ending the agreement and moving to a dealer model. On 1 January 2026, it gave notice ending TrueEV's exclusivity, saying the network "will function much better" with XPENG Motors Australia also distributing. TrueEV kept a right to distribute.
TrueEV sued in the Federal Court on 3 March 2026. It argued, among other things, that XPENG had changed its distribution model in a way the Franchising Code says requires compensation.
On 30 March, the Federal Court refused the interim injunction TrueEV sought to restrain XPENG Motors Australia’s proposed 1 April launch. The judge considered aspects of its Franchising Code argument arguable, but did not grant relief. XPENG estimated it could lose about $14.5 million if restrained until trial; that was XPENG’s evidence, not loss the court found it had incurred.
From there, the money questions decided the case:
$341,567.19 in costs for the injunction application TrueEV lost, payable by TrueEV.
$1,256,860 in security for XPENG's costs, ordered on 30 April in two payments of $628,430. That money is paid into court as a safeguard for the other side's costs. It is not a debt, and it is separate from the costs orders. TrueEV accepted that the legal test for security was met. That test asks whether there is reason to believe a company could not pay the other side's costs if it lost.
The first payment arrived late. The second was due by 10am on 19 August, after an extension.
On 17 July, TrueEV closed its Sydney flagship at Mascot. In August, the court recorded that TrueEV had bought no vehicles from XPENG since June 2025, no longer ran an XPENG sales and service network, and that its only remaining business was spare parts.
The second payment was not made. At 10am on 19 August, the case was dismissed with costs, and the court refused to reopen it the next day. TrueEV's own account says its claims did not proceed to trial and were not decided on their merits, which is correct: no trial took place.
A further costs decision dated 2 October, [2026] FCA 1453, quantified $202,372.46 following dismissal. Separate from the earlier $341,567.19 injunction-costs order, the two quantified orders total $543,939.65. Neither is the $1,256,860 security requirement. Payment or recovery has not been verified; the winding-up applications’ debt basis cannot be inferred from these orders.
The winding-up applications are listed at 9am on 4 November in the NSW Supreme Court.
What owners, dealers and creditors should check
The consequences depend on which company someone actually contracted with. Five groups have reason to follow the 4 November hearing:
XPENG, as the applicant. The notices do not state how much it says it is owed. The two costs orders total $543,939.65. Whether either has been paid, and whether either is the basis of the applications, is not on the public record.
The trade financier, whose receivers were appointed over vehicle stock in March.
Customers. XPENG Australia said in July it was paying eligible $5,000 cashback claims from TrueEV's promotion through its own process, "on a non-admission basis or goodwill". It also said those customers would be supported for service, repairs and warranty.
Dealers and franchise partners who signed with TrueEV.
Other creditors of the three companies. Each has its own creditors, and a debt is owed by the company named on the contract or invoice.
True EV Pty Ltd is the company that holds TrueEV's other business names, including Evolve Warranty, Evolve Protection and EV2Rent. What those products were and who bought them is not recorded on any public register.
What remains unresolved
How much XPENG says each TrueEV company owes, and what for.
What the receivers have recovered from the vehicle stock.
Whether the two costs orders have been paid, and whether they are the basis of the applications.
What happens on 4 November. The court can make orders, adjourn, or dismiss the applications.
The distinction at the heart of the case: the manufacturer holds XPENG’s marks and vehicle approvals, but customers and creditors may hold contracts with different TrueEV companies. The winding-up applications alone do not decide who must pay or perform those contracts.
Get the Weekly Brief — watch what happens next
The next test is the NSW Supreme Court hearing on 4 November, followed by any appointment, asset sale or creditor report. The Weekly Brief explains what new records mean. Choose it, the Full Register or investigation updates on the next screen.
If you are owed money by one of these companies and are unsure which one you dealt with: They owe me money
The Open Register reports public records, not advice. Winding-up applications are not findings of insolvency. This article does not establish the outcome of the applications, the merits of either side's claims in the dismissed Federal Court case, or what any customer is owed.
Sources and records
ASIC Published Notices: applications for winding-up orders against True EV Pty Ltd, True EV Retail Pty Ltd and True EV Distribution Pty Ltd, published 26 October 2026.
Federal Court of Australia: [2026] FCA 380 (injunction); [2026] FCA 534 (injunction costs); [2026] FCA 541 (security); [2026] FCA 1200 (dismissal); and [2026] FCA 1453 (further costs, case index).
ASIC insolvency appointment data: receivers to True EV Distribution Pty Ltd, 19 March 2026.
The ASIC company register and the business names register.
The federal register of road vehicle type approvals, read 26 October 2026.
IP Australia's trade mark register.
TrueEV, "TRUEEV & XPENG: The Facts & Timeline", read 26 October 2026.
Carsales, 15 July 2026, on XPENG Australia's support for TrueEV customers.
