JC Master Legal News Issue 1170

Key Takeaways for This Issue

The “Detailed Rules for the Implementation of Pilot Cross-Border Asset Management Business in the Hainan Free Trade Port” have been issued.
Recently, the Hainan Branch of the People’s Bank of China and the Hainan Regulatory Bureau of the China Securities Regulatory Commission jointly issued the “Detailed Rules for the Implementation of Cross-Border Asset Management Pilot Business in the Hainan Free Trade Port.”
The National Intellectual Property Administration plans to issue the “Measures for Promoting the Development of the Private Sector through Intellectual Property.”
On July 22, the National Intellectual Property Administration issued a notice soliciting public comments on the “Measures for Promoting the Development of the Private Economy through Intellectual Property (Draft for Public Comment),” with the deadline for submitting feedback set for August 5, 2025.
The Supreme People’s Court has released the key statistics for judicial adjudication in the first half of 2025.
On July 21, the Supreme People’s Court released key statistics on trial and enforcement activities across courts nationwide for the first half of 2025. During this period, a total of 21.092 million cases were filed, a year-on-year decrease of 8.52%.
The Supreme People’s Court has issued a legal interpretation concerning cases involving actions for objection to enforcement.
Recently, the Supreme People’s Court issued the “Interpretation on Issues Concerning the Application of Law in Adjudicating Cases of Objections to Enforcement,” which will take effect on July 24, 2025.

Finance & Capital Markets
The “Detailed Rules for the Implementation of Pilot Cross-Border Asset Management Business in the Hainan Free Trade Port” have been issued.
Recently, the Hainan Branch of the People’s Bank of China and the Hainan Regulatory Bureau of the China Securities Regulatory Commission jointly issued the “Detailed Rules for the Implementation of Cross-Border Asset Management Pilot Business in the Hainan Free Trade Port.”
With regard to pilot-scale management, the Implementing Rules stipulate that the cross-border asset management pilot shall be subject to scale management. The pilot scale refers to the net inflow of funds from overseas investors into the pilot asset management products, and at any given time, it may not exceed the overall pilot‑scale cap. The overall pilot scale is the sum of the individual pilot scales approved by the Hainan Branch of the People’s Bank of China for each issuing institution. The initial upper limit for the overall pilot scale is set at RMB 10 billion.

Commercial & Corporate
The National Intellectual Property Administration plans to issue the “Measures for Promoting the Development of the Private Sector through Intellectual Property.”
On July 22, the National Intellectual Property Administration issued a notice soliciting public comments on the “Measures for Promoting the Development of the Private Economy through Intellectual Property (Draft for Public Comment),” with the deadline for submitting feedback set for August 5, 2025.
The Measures comprise twenty-one articles, covering intellectual property creation, protection, utilization, and public services. They encourage private-sector entities to strengthen independent innovation and enhance the quality of intellectual property examination; call for bolstering the protection of innovative achievements by private-sector organizations and expanding diversified channels for dispute resolution; and support these entities in adopting various approaches to promote the commercialization and application of intellectual property, while exploring new models such as patent pools.
Public Consultation on the Operational Guidelines for Registration of Enterprise-Funded Basic Research Contracts in Beijing
On July 22, the Beijing Municipal Science and Technology Commission and the Zhongguancun Science Park Administrative Committee issued a public notice soliciting comments on the “Provisional Guidelines for the Registration of Enterprise‑Funded Basic Research Contracts in Beijing (Draft for Public Comment),” with the deadline for submitting comments set for July 28, 2025.
The “Operational Guidelines” apply to corporate contributions made to non‑profit research institutions, higher education institutions, and government‑funded natural science foundations for the purpose of conducting basic research. Eligible contributors and recipients may benefit from tax incentives, including pre‑tax deductions and additional tax deductions, while the recipient is exempt from corporate income tax. The Municipal Science and Technology Commission and the Zhongguancun Administrative Committee are responsible for contract registration and information sharing, and the Municipal Tax Service Bureau ensures the implementation of these tax benefits. Enterprises are required to enter into a written agreement specifying that the funds will be used for basic research. Once registered, such enterprises will receive priority consideration when applying for municipal natural science foundation projects.
For the first time, it has demanded a return to the pre‑concentration status; the State Administration for Market Regulation has prohibited Wuhan Yongtong from acquiring Shandong Huatai Pharmaceutical.
On July 23, the State Administration for Market Regulation issued an announcement regarding the antitrust review decision prohibiting Wuhan Yongtong Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. from acquiring equity in Shandong Beida Gaoke Huatai Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd.
Following its review, the State Administration for Market Regulation has determined that the equity transaction between Wuhan Yongtong and Shandong Huatai Pharmaceutical would eliminate or substantially restrict competition in the papaverine hydrochloride injection market. The Administration has ordered Wuhan Yongtong to divest its shares in Shandong Huatai Pharmaceutical by January 22, 2026, and to terminate the relevant agency agreements by September 30, 2025. This case marks the fourth prohibition of an operator concentration since the Anti-Monopoly Law came into effect, and also represents the first instance in which the Administration has required a completed concentration to be reverted to its pre‑concentration state.
Four departments jointly issued the “Opinions on Strengthening Democratic Management in Enterprises and Public Institutions.”
Recently, the All-China Federation of Trade Unions, the Ministry of Human Resources and Social Security, the State-owned Assets Supervision and Administration Commission of the State Council, and the All-China Federation of Industry and Commerce jointly issued the “Opinions on Strengthening Democratic Management in Enterprises and Public Institutions,” providing guidance for these entities to carry out democratic management in accordance with laws and regulations.
The “Opinions” comprise six key areas and 13 specific provisions, primarily focusing on improving the institutional mechanisms for Party leadership over democratic management in enterprises and public institutions, including the system of workers’ congresses, the system of open factory affairs, the system of worker directors and supervisors, and consultation and coordination mechanisms. They emphasize that enterprises and public institutions are the principal entities responsible for democratic management, with Party organizations integrating this into their Party-building efforts and trade unions tasked with ensuring implementation. The document also supports the establishment of a collective bargaining system and encourages diverse channels for communication with employees. By standardizing the principles, procedures, and content of democratic management systems, these “Opinions” aim to enhance both the scope and quality of such systems.
The State Administration for Market Regulation has issued the Enforcement Guidelines for the Advertising Law (Part II).
Recently, the State Administration for Market Regulation issued the “Enforcement Guidelines on the Application of the Advertising Law of the People’s Republic of China (II),” further clarifying jurisdictional provisions for advertising violations to prevent buck-passing and “long‑distance fishing.”
Guideline No. 2 focuses on refining the jurisdictional rules for advertising violations. With respect to advertising media, the guideline elaborates on the jurisdictional provisions applicable to different types of media. Illegal advertisements published through radio, television, newspapers, magazines, the internet, films, and other media are subject to the jurisdiction of the place where the publisher is located; advertisements disseminated via mobile carriers such as product packaging, printed materials, and vehicles are governed by the jurisdiction of the location where the violation occurred, with an explicit emphasis on avoiding overlapping jurisdictions. Market regulatory authorities are required to exercise jurisdiction over all parties involved in a case, leaving no entity unaccounted for. Higher-level market regulatory authorities may assume direct or designated jurisdiction, thereby enhancing enforcement efficiency, preventing overreach or duplicate penalties, and safeguarding the legitimate rights and interests of business entities.

Taxation
General Administration of Customs: Provisional Measures for the Tax Administration of Duty-Free Goods with Processed Value-Added in the Hainan Free Trade Port
The General Administration of Customs recently issued the “Provisional Measures of the People’s Republic of China on the Tax Administration of Duty-Free Goods with Processed Value-Added in the Hainan Free Trade Port.”
It is stated that, for goods produced by enterprises engaged in encouraged industries within the Hainan Free Trade Port, where the value added through processing in the Hainan Free Trade Port—based on imported components—reaches or exceeds 30%, import duties shall be exempted when such goods are shipped from the Hainan Free Trade Port to the mainland, while value-added tax and consumption tax at the import stage shall be levied in accordance with applicable regulations.
The Provisional Measures for the Identification and Administration of Hainan‑Produced Goods under the Duty‑Free Policy for Processing Value‑Added Activities in the Hainan Free Trade Port have been issued.
On July 25, the People’s Government of Hainan Province issued the Provisional Measures for the Identification and Administration of Hainan‑Produced Goods under the Duty‑Free Processing Value‑Added Policy of the Hainan Free Trade Port.
The “Measures for Determination” comprise six chapters and 26 articles, covering general provisions, criteria for distinguishing between Hainan‑produced goods and mainland‑origin goods, conditions and procedures for determination, management of Hainan‑produced goods, risk prevention and control, and supplementary provisions. Notably, the measures clearly define the standards for identifying Hainan‑produced goods, including those that are wholly obtained or produced within the Hainan Free Trade Port, as well as their processed finished products, thereby strictly delineating the scope of their origin. Prior to the commencement of closed‑port operations, all domestically sourced materials purchased by pilot enterprises under the duty‑free processing‑value‑added policy must be included in the valuation of domestic materials. Following the launch of closed‑port operations, enterprises registered for processing‑value‑added may deduct the price of Hainan‑produced goods—certified in accordance with these Measures—from the cost of domestically procured materials, thus encouraging such enterprises to utilize Hainan‑produced goods in their production processes.

LITIGATION & ARBITRATION
The Supreme People’s Court has released the key statistics for judicial adjudication in the first half of 2025.
On July 21, the Supreme People’s Court released key statistics on trial and enforcement activities across courts nationwide for the first half of 2025. During this period, a total of 21.092 million cases were filed, a year-on-year decrease of 8.52%.
According to relevant data, in the first half of 2025, the court system handled a total of 767,000 criminal cases and 13.829 million civil and commercial cases (including 12.372 million first-instance civil and commercial cases, up 38.87% year on year). First-instance labor dispute cases numbered 436,000, and corporate‑related disputes totaled 97,000, representing year-on-year increases of 40.17% and 78.42%, respectively. During the same period, 5.608 million enforcement cases were filed, with an execution completion rate of 41.96% and an actual funds recovered rate of 54.38%. First-instance foreign-related civil and commercial cases rose by 52%. Meanwhile, the appeal rate, the rate of applications for retrial, and the number of long‑pending litigation cases all declined year on year, reflecting continued improvements in the quality and efficiency of adjudication.
The Supreme People’s Court has issued a legal interpretation concerning cases involving actions for objection to enforcement.
Recently, the Supreme People’s Court issued the “Interpretation on Issues Concerning the Application of Law in Adjudicating Cases of Objections to Enforcement,” which will take effect on July 24, 2025.
The Interpretation comprises twenty-three articles, primarily clarifying issues such as jurisdiction, filing of actions, and consolidated adjudication in enforcement objection lawsuits; refining the effect of judgments in such cases on enforcement proceedings; and standardizing coordination between adjudication and enforcement. It also sets forth detailed provisions regarding conditions for excluding compulsory enforcement with respect to the rights and interests of commercial housing consumers and purchasers of real estate, and clearly defines the legal liabilities and corresponding measures applicable to those who obstruct lawful enforcement through fraudulent litigation.
The Supreme People’s Court has released typical cases involving enforcement objections in property rights protection.
On July 23, the Supreme People’s Court issued the “Interpretation on Legal Issues in Adjudicating Cases of Objections to Enforcement,” and simultaneously released six typical cases involving enforcement objection lawsuits related to the protection of property rights.
In this batch of typical cases, Case 1 underscores the coordinated efforts of adjudication and enforcement to resolve a purchaser’s objection to enforcement; the court upheld the purchaser, Wang Moumou’s, objection and stayed the compulsory execution against his property. Case 2 holds that the legitimate rights and interests of commercial housing consumers should be given priority protection; the second-instance court sustained the objections of Han Moping and Wang Mou, halting the auction of the property. In Case 3, the court granted the objection of Han Mou, a migrant worker in the city, thereby excluding the mortgage right from compulsory enforcement. Case 4 addresses the principle that compensation rights arising from expropriation take precedence over mortgage rights; the court upheld the villagers’ group’s objection. In Case 5, the court recognized the contractor’s agreement to satisfy debt by way of property, thereby precluding the enforcement of the mortgage. Case 6 reveals the punishment for fraudulent litigation aimed at evading enforcement; the court ascertained the truth and proceeded with the enforcement of the property involved.
The Supreme People’s Court has released typical cases of credit rehabilitation for persons subject to enforcement.
On July 25, the Supreme People’s Court released nine typical cases, emphasizing the strict distinction between judgment debtors who are both untrustworthy and incapacitated, and strengthening measures for credit rehabilitation.
The cases underscore the importance of strictly distinguishing between default and incapacity, thereby avoiding rigid enforcement. For individuals who are incapacitated and have no assets available for execution, courts may apply a grace-period regime to provide relief and alleviate their burdens. In contrast, for instances of malicious non‑compliance, courts intensify their enforcement efforts to safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of prevailing parties. These cases, including the civil loan dispute between Chen and Di, illustrate how the courts strike a balance between punitive measures and assistance during the enforcement process, thus fostering the sound development of market entities.

JC Master Law Office
Address: 9th Floor, National Water Resources Building, No. 70 Qingjiang South Road, Nanjing City
Postal Code: 210036
Phone: 025-84503333
Fax: 025-84505533
Website: www.jcmaster.com
This legal notice is provided solely for informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice or a legal analysis of any specific case. The transmission of this legal notice does not establish an attorney–client relationship between JC Master Law Office and the user or viewer. JC Master Law Office assumes no responsibility for any third-party content accessible via the internet. If you do not wish to receive this legal notice, please notify us by email at jcm@jcmaster.com.
The copyright in this legal information is owned by JC Master Law Office ©. Without written permission, no organization or individual may reproduce, publish, or cite it in any form.