Taihe Updates | Several Taihe lawyers attended the 4th Yangtze River Delta Capital Markets Legal Services Exchange Conference and participated in a roundtable forum.

On September 4, 2026, the Fourth Yangtze River Delta Capital Markets Legal Services Exchange Conference was successfully held at the Hangzhou Zhijiang Hotel Convention Center. The event, themed “Empowering Integrated Development of Securities Legal Services through the Rule of Law,” was co-hosted by the Zhejiang Provincial Lawyers Association, the Anhui Provincial Lawyers Association, the Jiangsu Provincial Lawyers Association, and the Shanghai Lawyers Association. Several lawyers from Taihe Law Firm were invited to attend and served as moderators and panelists at the roundtable forum on “Corporate Governance, Compliance, and Risk Management for Listed Companies.”

This exchange event centered on three core topics: the current state of IPO business development for the 2025–2026 period, the evolution of M&A and restructuring activities under the backdrop of robust support policies, and corporate governance compliance and risk management for listed companies. Among these, the roundtable forum on “Corporate Governance, Compliance, and Risk Management” delved further into pressing issues such as standards for corporate governance and information disclosure compliance, delineation of duties and responsibilities for directors, supervisors, and senior executives, constraints on the conduct of controlling shareholders, risk prevention and control in the context of criminal‑administrative coordination, responses to public opinion and litigation, practical aspects of bankruptcy and reorganization for listed companies, and the transformation pathways for lawyers engaged in capital market practice. The forum was moderated by Attorney Li Yuanyang, Director of the Taihe Management Committee and Chair of the Securities and Capital Markets Committee of the Jiangsu Provincial Lawyers Association.

At the outset of the forum, Attorney Li Yuanyang, in his role as moderator, noted that the regulatory landscape for corporate governance of listed companies is undergoing profound transformation. The regulatory approach has shifted from fragmented, ad hoc oversight to a comprehensive, system‑wide framework, establishing a new regime of coordinated judicial and administrative supervision and integrated accountability spanning administrative, civil, and criminal spheres. This roundtable focused on four core dimensions: the latest governance regulations, regulatory sanctions, distress relief and restructuring, and legal practice. With the implementation of landmark policies such as the “Corporate Governance Guidelines for Listed Companies” and the “Regulatory Rules for Board Secretaries of Listed Companies,” significant institutional overhauls are underway—reshaping the duties of directors and senior executives, tightening constraints on controlling shareholders and de facto controllers, redefining the powers and responsibilities of board secretaries, and strengthening the oversight functions of audit committees. Under increasingly stringent regulation, risks such as violations of information disclosure requirements, deficiencies in control‑interest disclosures, financial fraud, misappropriation of funds, and unauthorized guarantees continue to occur with alarming frequency. End‑to‑end accountability has become the norm, markedly elevating the compliance risks faced by directors, supervisors, senior management, and de facto controllers, while the intersection of administrative and criminal enforcement further accentuates criminal compliance risks. Meanwhile, evolving frameworks for risk resolution and bankruptcy restructuring place heightened demands on corporate risk management and compliance‑oriented arrangements regarding control‑interest matters. The organizers hope that the distinguished panelists will draw on real‑world cases to identify the key challenges in implementing these new rules, dissect the practical hurdles in regulatory sanctions, the interplay between administrative and criminal law, and restructuring and distress‑relief processes, and collaboratively explore viable pathways for compliant corporate governance and effective risk mitigation.

Subsequently, Mr. Liu Yufei, Head of Compliance Consulting at Taihe (Shenzhen), shared, from a practical perspective on compliance consulting and risk management, the key priorities for listed‑company governance under recent revisions to major capital‑market regulatory frameworks. He noted that the newly revised Guidelines on Corporate Governance for Listed Companies establish end‑to‑end oversight covering the entire lifecycle of directors and senior executives, addressing previous institutional gaps in post‑termination accountability. Specifically, it mandates pre‑emptive arrangements for holding departing officers accountable and recovering losses, conducts performance‑based reviews upon departure, and eliminates the loophole whereby “resignation absolves one of responsibility.” At the same time, it refines remuneration constraints, stipulating that performance‑related pay must account for at least 50% of total compensation, enforces suspension and clawback of remuneration, and implements deferred payment schedules. The Regulatory Rules for Board Secretaries of Listed Companies further clarify the scope of board secretaries’ duties: they bear full responsibility for ensuring the truthfulness, accuracy, and completeness of ad hoc disclosures; focus on organizing, coordinating, and supervising financial reporting; identify and verify significant anomalies in periodic reports, report them accordingly, and propose corrective measures. The rules also underscore the requirements of professionalism and full‑time dedication, setting a minimum threshold of five years of relevant experience and mandating that board secretaries devote their primary efforts to their core responsibilities while strictly limiting inappropriate side engagements. Meanwhile, the Regulations on the Supervision and Administration of Listed Companies (Draft for Public Comment) codifies established regulatory practices into administrative regulations, dedicating a separate chapter to refining corporate governance, filling gaps in higher‑level legislation, and enhancing governance effectiveness across multiple dimensions. It strengthens information‑disclosure oversight to combat financial fraud, explicitly prohibiting related parties, upstream and downstream entities, and service providers from assisting listed companies in preparing false financial statements through falsified documents or fictitious transactions. The draft also urges companies to align their internal compliance controls with these new provisions to prevent fraud risks throughout the entire supply chain.

Drawing on his practical experience, Attorney Shi Qiao, a partner at Taihe and Director of the Securities, Futures, and Fund Law Committee of the Nanjing Lawyers Association, highlighted several key issues in the securities field, including integrated administrative‑criminal‑civil risk management and cross‑disciplinary team collaboration in response to complex capital market incidents. He noted that under the registration‑based system, the capital market is firmly oriented toward “zero tolerance” regulation. Once a listed company commits a regulatory violation, it typically triggers multiple legal consequences—civil liability, administrative penalties, and criminal accountability—while administrative, criminal, and civil proceedings are intricately intertwined and evidence and facts feed into one another. As a result, relying solely on compliance or litigation perspectives is no longer sufficient to manage such risks effectively. Listed companies, as well as their directors, supervisors, and senior executives, should adopt an integrated approach to risk assessment that spans administrative, criminal, and civil dimensions. From the very outset of a potential risk, they must simultaneously evaluate all three categories of legal liability and establish end‑to‑end mechanisms covering pre‑emptive compliance alerts, responsive investigations during the event, and post‑incident dispute resolution. This will help avoid the reactive scenario of addressing only administrative sanctions while neglecting the cascading criminal and civil risks. Furthermore, he emphasized that handling these highly complex capital market crises requires close coordination among a law firm’s various practice groups—capital markets, compliance, criminal law, and dispute resolution—and relies on cross‑disciplinary teamwork. Only through such collaborative efforts can firms seamlessly integrate evidence analysis, regulatory communication, responses to civil claims, and measures to mitigate criminal risks, thereby providing listed companies and other responsible parties with systematic, holistic solutions.

During the forum’s closing session, Attorney Li Yuanyang summarized and responded to the panelists’ viewpoints, concluding with a reflection on the enhancement of corporate governance among listed companies. He noted that, drawing on the insights shared by all participants, it is clear that corporate governance has entered a new phase of systemic management. At the institutional level, a series of recent regulatory measures have addressed longstanding governance gaps, strengthened accountability for the “key few,” and restructured internal oversight frameworks. On the regulatory front, administrative, civil, and criminal liabilities are being pursued in a coordinated manner, while risks are increasingly taking on preemptive and networked characteristics—meaning that companies can no longer rely solely on post‑event remedies to manage risk. Listed companies must recognize that, once listed, they no longer belong exclusively to their controlling shareholders; they must establish robust, checks-and-balances‑based internal control mechanisms, reinforce the oversight roles of audit committees and independent directors, maintain comprehensive records of履职 activities, and embed compliance throughout every stage of business operations. In the face of multifaceted challenges—including regulatory sanctions and accountability, investor claims, public‑opinion crises, and debt distress—companies must adopt a full‑cycle risk‑management mindset and integrate responses to administrative investigations, civil litigation, and criminal risks. Meanwhile, securities lawyers should leverage their expertise not only to handle crises effectively but also to proactively build and strengthen compliance frameworks, thereby helping listed companies refine their governance structures and supporting the high‑quality development of the capital market.

The forum featured lively on-site interactions, with participants engaging in in-depth discussions on pressing issues and practical challenges in corporate governance, compliance, and risk management.

Taihe has long been deeply engaged in capital market legal services and corporate compliance and governance, leveraging its solid professional expertise and extensive practical experience to provide pragmatic, reliable legal support to enterprises across the Yangtze River Delta region. By participating in this exchange event, Taihe’s lawyers have further strengthened professional collaboration with their peers and contributed to the coordinated development of legal services for the regional capital market. Moving forward, Taihe Law Firm will remain committed to its core strengths and a practice‑oriented approach, striving to deliver high‑quality compliance and dispute‑resolution services to listed companies and a wide range of market participants, thereby supporting the steady and sustainable advancement of rule‑of‑law governance in the Yangtze River Delta’s capital markets.

This exchange event, co-hosted by the bar associations of the four provinces and municipalities in the Yangtze River Delta, has become a key platform for the professional and collaborative development of legal services in the regional capital markets. Taihe Law Firm will continue to actively engage in industry-wide exchanges, working with colleagues from all sectors to advance the standardization and innovation of securities‑related legal services.

Follow us