為便于業界及時了解金融資管行業熱點，海問每月發布《海問金融資管月刊》，介紹并簡評監管新規及行業動態。
2025年1月，監管新規方面，國家金融監督管理總局（以下簡稱“金融監管總局”）發布《保險公司監管評級辦法》《金融租賃公司監管評級辦法》及《小額貸款公司監督管理暫行辦法》；中國證券監督管理委員會（“中國證監會”）發布《中國證監會行政處罰裁量基本規則》及《證券期貨法律適用意見第19號——<上市公司收購管理辦法>第十三條、第十四條的適用意見》；國務院發布《國務院關于規范中介機構為公司公開發行股票提供服務的規定》。行業動態方面，中央金融委員會辦公室（“中央金融辦”）、中國證監會、財政部、人力資源社會保障部、中國人民銀行、金融監管總局聯合印發《關于推動中長期資金入市工作的實施方案》；同時海問總結部分中國證券投資基金業協會（“基金業協會”）2025年1月紀律處分案例以供了解。
金融監管總局于2025年1月7日發布《保險公司監管評級辦法》（“《保險公司評級辦法》”），其主要內容包括：
（1）適用范圍與評級對象：《保險公司評級辦法》適用于我國境內開業滿一個完整會計年度以上的保險公司，包括保險集團（控股）公司、財產保險公司、人身保險公司、再保險公司及外國保險公司分公司。（2）評級要素與權重分配：評級要素涵蓋公司治理、償付能力、負債質量、資產質量（含資產負債匹配）、信息科技、風險管理、經營狀況、消費者權益保護及其他。各要素權重之和為100%，其中公司治理、償付能力權重均不低于15%；負債質量、資產質量、信息科技、風險管理權重均不低于10%；經營狀況、消費者權益保護權重均不低于5%。保險集團（控股）公司可調整部分要素權重，再保險公司可不設置消費者權益保護要素。（3）評級結果分級與監管措施：評級結果分為1—5級和S級，數值越大風險越高，其中，針對1級/2級公司，監管機構無需采取特別措施，支持市場準入與業務創新；針對3級公司，監管機構提高非現場監管頻率，限制分支機構增設及高風險業務；針對4級公司，監管機構采取限制高管薪酬、股東分紅，責令增資或調整業務結構等措施；針對5級/S級公司，監管機構制定風險處置方案，推動重組或市場退出。（4）評級周期為一年，評價期間為每年1月1日至12月31日，原則上于次年3月底前完成。海問簡評
《保險公司評級辦法》以系統性框架強化分類監管，體現了穿透式監管原則，其分級處置措施優化了監管資源配置。
2. 金融監管總局發布《金融租賃公司監管評級辦法》
2025年1月23日金融監管總局發布《金融租賃公司監管評級辦法》（“《金融租賃公司評級辦法》”），對《中國銀保監會辦公廳關于印發金融租賃公司監管評級辦法（試行）的通知》進行了多項重要修訂，旨在進一步加強對金融租賃公司的監管，提升其風險防控能力。主要內容有：
（1）評級要素調整：形成五大評級維度，即公司治理（20%）、資本管理（15%）、風險管理（30%）、專業能力（25%）、信息科技管理（10%），通過調整權重，持續突出風險管理和專業能力的重要性，同時新增信息科技管理以契合金融科技發展趨勢，引導公司提升數字化管理水平。（2）監管評級級次優化：評級結果從優到劣劃分為1-5級和S級，數值越大風險越高。出現重大風險的直接列為5級，于重組、被接管或市場退出階段的列為S級，不參與當年評級。評級完成后，若公司發生重大情勢變化（如重大風險事件或監管新發現），可動態調整評級結果，提升監管時效性。（3）強化評級結果運用：評級結果作為市場準入（如業務范圍調整、機構設立）的審慎性條件，高評級公司可優先試點創新業務，低評級公司可能被暫停專項業務或面臨高強度監管。對評級下降的公司，可暫停業務但給予一年觀察期，期間業務暫不受影響，鼓勵公司及時糾偏。海問簡評
本次修訂通過整合評級要素、細化風險分級及動態調整機制，構建了更精準的金融租賃公司監管框架，體現了“風險為本”的監管理念。新增信息科技管理維度順應了數字化轉型趨勢，而分級分類監管和觀察期機制則平衡了風險防控與機構發展需求。3. 金融監管總局發布《小額貸款公司監督管理暫行辦法》
金融監管總局發布《小額貸款公司監督管理暫行辦法》（“《小額貸款公司監管辦法》”），旨在規范小額貸款公司（含網絡小額貸款公司）的經營行為，強化監管，防范風險，促進行業健康發展。其主要內容如下：
（1）規定貸款集中度與限額：小額貸款公司對同一借款人的貸款余額不得超過上年末凈資產的10%，對同一借款人及其關聯方的貸款余額不得超過15%；網絡小額貸款公司單戶消費貸款上限為20萬元，生產經營貸款上限為1000萬元，突出“小額、分散”的普惠定位。（2）加強合作機構管理：禁止將授信審查、風險控制等核心業務外包，不得與無放貸資質的機構合作發放貸款，與商業銀行聯合發放的網絡貸款中的單筆出資比例不得低于30%；合作機構的網站、APP等需依法備案，并建立名單制準入機制。（3）明確禁止性行為：嚴禁出租、出借牌照，為無資質主體提供“通道”；不得使用合作機構預存保證金放貸；禁止暴力催收、誘導過度負債等。（4）明確融資杠桿限制：非標準化融資（如銀行借款、股東借款）余額不得超過上年末凈資產的1倍，標準化融資（如債券、資產證券化）余額不得超過4倍；股東借款需為自有資金，發行債券需滿足連續三個會計年度盈利等條件。（5）強化風險管理：逾期90天以上的貸款需劃為不良貸款，并實施放貸資金專戶管理，禁止通過個人賬戶操作資金；網絡小額貸款需全流程線上操作，并建立數據驅動的風控體系。（6）完善消費者權益保護：禁止先行扣費、捆綁銷售、將貸款列為默認支付選項等行為；強化營銷宣傳規范，不得片面宣傳低門檻、低利率，需保障客戶知情權和信息安全。海問簡評
《小額貸款公司監管辦法》的出臺標志著小額貸款行業進入“強監管”時代，通過明確業務邊界、限制融資杠桿、細化風險管控，系統性填補了監管空白。4. 中國證監會發布《中國證監會行政處罰裁量基本規則》
中國證監會于2025年1月17日發布《中國證監會行政處罰裁量基本規則》（“《裁量規則》”），自2025年3月1日起施行。該規則旨在統一執法標準、規范裁量權行使，強化資本市場監管的透明性和公平性。主要內容如下：
（1）明確裁量階次與適用情形：《裁量規則》將行政處罰分為六檔裁量階次：不予處罰、免予處罰、減輕處罰、從輕處罰、一般處罰、從重處罰，并細化各階次的適用條件。（2）細化處罰規則與責任認定：針對共同違法行為，采取“先整體認定后分別處罰”原則，根據各參與者的地位、作用分配責任；但法律已規定獨立罰則的（如控股股東指使實施欺詐發行），按特殊規則處理；綜合考量職務、知情程度、履職情況等因素確定單位責任人員處罰幅度；獨立違法行為罰款累計計算，遵循“一事不二罰”原則。（3）行刑銜接：先行后刑時，已沒收違法所得或罰款的，移送司法機關時需載明情況；先刑后行時，被判處罰金后不再重復罰款；免予刑事處罰但需行政處罰時，依法處理。（4）監督與決策機制：對情節復雜或重大違法行為，需經中國證監會負責人集體討論決定；若適用規則顯失公平或情況變化，需經中國證監會主要負責人批準；中國證監會加強對派出機構處罰權行使的監督，確保執法統一。海問簡評
《裁量規則》通過量化裁量標準、細化情節分類，顯著提升了行政處罰的透明度和可預期性，體現了從嚴監管與過罰相當的平衡。5. 中國證監會發布《證券期貨法律適用意見第19號——<上市公司收購管理辦法>第十三條、第十四條的適用意見》
2025年1月10日，中國證監會發布《證券期貨法律適用意見第19號——<上市公司收購管理辦法>第十三條、第十四條的適用意見》（“《適用意見》”）。
根據《上市公司收購管理辦法》（“《收購辦法》”），投資者及其一致行動人持股達到5%后，其所持股份比例每增加或者減少5%，應當報告與公告，在該事實發生之日起至公告后三日內，不得再行買賣該上市公司的股票。在《適用意見》發布以前，實踐中存在持股比例達到5%及其整數倍時（如10%、15%、20%、25%、30%等），暫停交易并披露和持股比例增減量達到5%時（如6%增至11%、12%減至7%），暫停交易并披露兩種理解，本次《適用意見》明確應當采用第一種理解，即投資者占有持股比例達到5%、10%、15%等節點時須暫停交易，并進行報告和公告；《適用意見》同時明確“達到5%”不僅包含比例升至5%的情形，還包含比例降至5%的情形；最后《適用意見》明確因上市公司增發股份、減少股本、債轉股等上市公司變化而被動觸及披露刻度的投資者的披露免責以及對于《適用意見》施行前實施但施行后發現的違規行為，采取“從舊兼從輕”的原則進行新舊劃斷。海問簡評
《適用意見》明確《收購辦法》第十三條和第十四條的適用細節，為投資者在股權比例變化時提供了清晰的報告指引，解決了實踐中關于持股比例增減披露標準不同的問題，明確暫停交易及報告的情況。同時，設定了免責條款，并強調“從舊兼從輕”的原則，體現了監管的合理性與靈活性，進一步增強了法律適用的明確性與可操作性。6. 國務院發布《國務院關于規范中介機構為公司公開發行股票提供服務的規定》
2025年1月10日，國務院發布了《國務院關于規范中介機構為公司公開發行股票提供服務的規定》（“《規范中介規定》”），該規定已于2025年2月15日施行。其主要內容有：
（1）適用范圍：證券公司、會計師事務所、律師事務所等中介機構為境內公司境內公開發行股票提供付費服務的行為。（2）禁止參與違法行為與信息披露義務：中介機構不得配合發行人實施財務造假、欺詐發行、違規信息披露等行為，且其出具的文件不得存在虛假記載、誤導性陳述或重大遺漏；發行人需在招股說明書或其他文件中詳細披露中介服務收費標準、金額及付費安排。（3）收費規范：根據工作量、資源投入等因素合理收費，并在合同中明確約定；證券公司保薦業務、會計師事務所審計業務不得以股票發行上市結果或審計結果作為收費條件，律師事務所須統一收費，符合國務院司法行政部門規定；不得在合同外收取費用、規避監管調節收費，或通過入股、上市獎勵等謀取不正當利益。（4）監管措施：證券監管、財政、司法行政等部門協同監管，必要時可開展聯合檢查，依法查處違規行為；地方政府不得以股票上市結果為由給予發行人及中介機構獎勵，違規獎勵需追回并追責。海問簡評
《規范中介規定》通過明確執業邊界、強化收費透明度和構建多部門協同監管框架，系統性規范中介機構的服務行為，有利于遏制財務造假、利益輸送等亂象，提升資本市場公信力?！兑幏吨薪橐幎ā穼嵤┖?，中介機構需全面修訂合同條款，加強內控合規，否則可能面臨高額處罰及聲譽風險。
1. 中央金融辦、中國證監會、財政部、人力資源社會保障部、中國人民銀行、金融監管總局聯合印發《關于推動中長期資金入市工作的實施方案》2025年1月，中央金融辦等機構聯合印發《關于推動中長期資金入市工作的實施方案》（“《實施方案》”），重點引導中長期資金（如商業保險資金、全國社會保障基金、基本養老保險基金、企（職）業年金基金、公募基金等）進一步加大入市力度，主要亮點有：
（1）對國有保險公司經營績效全面實行三年以上的長周期考核，凈資產收益率當年度考核權重不高于30%，三年到五年周期指標權重不低于60%。（2）穩步提升全國社會保障基金股票類資產投資比例，推動有條件地區進一步擴大基本養老保險基金委托投資規模。細化明確全國社會保障基金五年以上、基本養老保險基金投資運營三年以上長周期業績考核機制，支持全國社會保障基金理事會充分發揮專業投資優勢。（3）引導上市公司加大股份回購力度，落實一年多次分紅政策。推動上市公司加大股份回購增持再貸款工具的運用。允許公募基金、商業保險資金、基本養老保險基金、企（職）業年金基金、銀行理財等作為戰略投資者參與上市公司定增。在參與新股申購、上市公司定增、舉牌認定標準方面，給予銀行理財、保險資管與公募基金同等政策待遇。進一步擴大證券基金保險公司互換便利操作規模。2025年1月，基金業協會共發布紀律處分案例二十余例，值得關注的有：
（1）中基協處分〔2024〕495號案例中，管理人因兩項違規行為被基金業協會警告：一是未如實報告其接受委托代持某數碼公司股權的事實，產品備案信息與實際不符；二是未及時向基金業協會報告股東、注冊地、辦公地等變更信息，違反相關規定。（2）中基協處分〔2024〕483號案例中，基金業協會根據管理人基金產品的托管戶銀行流水認定基金產品于2018年7月受讓管理人股東持有的某信息科技有限公司的股權，屬于私募基金以基金財產與管理人關聯方發生直接交易的行為。管理人未就該關聯交易進行臨時報告，也未在2018年年度報告中進行披露。管理人認為該股東僅作為基金投資者參與認購該基金產品，不屬于私募股權基金的關聯交易行為，協會最終未認可該申辯意見。（3）中基協處分〔2024〕506號案例中，管理人自認未對部分投資者履行特定對象確認程序。管理人申辯其并未向不特定對象宣傳推介私募基金，此部分投資者為管理人運營人員前同事及多年好友，系特定對象間的民間借貸關系，因此申請減輕紀律處分?；饦I協會最終未認可該項理由。
● https://www.nfra.gov.cn/cn/view/pages/ItemDetail.html?docId=1195501&itemId=915&generaltype=0● https://www.nfra.gov.cn/cn/view/pages/ItemDetail.html?docId=1196824&itemId=915&generaltype=0● https://www.nfra.gov.cn/cn/view/pages/ItemDetail.html?docId=1195504&itemId=915&generaltype=0● http://www.csrc.gov.cn/csrc/c100028/c7534325/content.shtml● http://www.csrc.gov.cn/csrc/c100028/c7532784/content.shtml● http://www.csrc.gov.cn/csrc/c100028/c7533734/content.shtml● http://www.pbc.gov.cn/goutongjiaoliu/113456/113469/5574170/index.html● https://www.gov.cn/zhengce/202501/content_7000850.htm● https://www.amac.org.cn/zlgl/jlcf/scfjg/202501/P020250117623636136223.pdf● https://www.amac.org.cn/zlgl/jlcf/scfjg/202501/P020250110622329092994.pdf● https://www.amac.org.cn/zlgl/jlcf/scfjg/202501/P020250124625060066184.pdfHaiwen Finance and Asset Management Monthly (January 2025)
Introduction
To make the finance and asset management industry keep abreast of the latest industry developments, Haiwen prepares the “Haiwen Finance and Asset Management Monthly”. This monthly reading aims to introduce and provide brief comments on regulatory development and industry news.
In January 2025, regarding regulatory updates, the National Financial Regulatory Administration (“NFRA”) issued the Measures for the Supervision and Rating of Insurance Companies, the Measures for the Supervision and Rating of Financial Leasing Companies, and the Interim Measures for the Supervision and Administration of Microfinance Companies. The China Securities Regulatory Commission (“CSRC”) issued the Basic Rules for Administrative Penalty Discretion of the CSRC and the Opinions on the Application of Securities and Futures Laws No. 19 - Interpretation of Articles 13 and 14 of the Administrative Measures for the Acquisition of Listed Companies. The State Council issued the Regulations on Standardizing the Services Provided by Intermediary Institutions for Companies’ Public Issuance of Stocks.
Regarding industry developments, the Central Financial Commission Office (“CFCO”), CSRC, Ministry of Finance (“MOF”), Ministry of Human Resources and Social Security (“MHRSS”), People’s Bank of China (“PBC”), and NFRA jointly issued the Implementation Plan for Promoting the Entry of Medium- and Long-Term Funds into the Market. Additionally, Haiwen summarized some disciplinary cases from the Asset Management Association of China (“AMAC”) in January 2025 for reference.
I Latest Rules and Regulation
1. NFRA Issued the Measures for the Supervision and Rating of Insurance Companies
On January 7, 2025, the NFRA issued theMeasures for the Supervision and Rating of Insurance Companies (“Insurance Company Rating Measures”), with the following key points:（1）Scope of Application and Rating Targets: The Insurance Company Rating Measures apply to insurance companies operating in China for at least one full fiscal year, including insurance groups (holding companies), property insurance companies, life insurance companies, reinsurance companies, and branches of foreign insurance companies.（2）Rating Elements and Weight Distribution: The rating elements include corporate governance, solvency, liability quality, asset quality (including asset-liability matching), information technology, risk management, operating conditions, consumer rights protection, and others. The total weight of all elements is 100%, with corporate governance and solvency each accounting for no less than 15%; liability quality, asset quality, information technology, and risk management each accounting for no less than 10%; and operating conditions and consumer rights protection each accounting for no less than 5%. Insurance groups (holding companies) may adjust the weights of certain elements, while reinsurance companies may exclude the consumer rights protection element.（3）Rating Results and Supervisory Measures: Rating results are divided into Levels 1–5 and Level S, with higher numbers indicating higher risk.● For Level 1/2 companies, regulators do not impose special measures and support market entry and business innovation.● For Level 3 companies, regulators increase off-site supervision frequency, restrict branch expansion, and limit high-risk business activities.● For Level 4 companies, regulators impose measures such as restricting executive compensation and shareholder dividends, requiring capital increases, or adjusting business structures.● For Level 5/S companies, regulators develop risk resolution plans to facilitate restructuring or market exit.（4）The rating cycle is one year, covering the period from January 1 to December 31, with results generally finalized by the end of March of the following year.The Insurance Company Rating Measures strengthen classified supervision. This reflects the principle of penetrating supervision, while the tiered resolution measures optimize the allocation of regulatory resources.2. NFRA Issued the Measures for the Supervision and Rating of Financial Leasing Companies
On January 23, 2025, the NFRA issued theMeasures for the Supervision and Rating of Financial Leasing Companies (“Financial Leasing Company Rating Measures”), introducing significant revisions to the Notice of the General Office of the China Banking and Insurance Regulatory Commission on Issuing the Trial Measures for the Supervision and Rating of Financial Leasing Companies. These revisions aim to further strengthen the supervision of financial leasing companies and enhance their risk prevention and control capabilities. The key points are as follows:（1）Adjustment of Rating Elements: The rating framework now consists of five key dimensions:● Corporate Governance (20%);● Capital Management (15%);● Professional Competence (25%);● Information Technology Management (10%).By adjusting the weight distribution, the revisions emphasize the importance ofrisk management and professional competence, while introducing information technology management to align with the development of financial technology. This addition aims to guide companies in improving their digital management capabilities.（2）Optimization of Supervisory Rating Levels: The rating results are categorized into Levels 1–5 and Level S, ranked from best to worst, with higher numbers indicating higher risk. Companies with significant risks are directly classified as Level 5, while those undergoing restructuring, being taken over, or exiting the market are classified as Level S and excluded from the annual rating process. After the rating is completed, if a company experiences significant changes (e.g., major risk events or new regulatory findings), the rating results can be dynamically adjusted to enhance regulatory responsiveness.（3）Strengthened Application of Rating Results: The rating results serve as prudential conditions for market access, such as adjustments to business scope or the establishment of institutions. Companies with high ratings may be prioritized for piloting innovative businesses, while low-rated companies may face suspension of specific business activities or heightened regulatory scrutiny. For companies with downgraded ratings, business operations may be temporarily suspended, but they are granted a one-year observation period during which their business activities remain unaffected, encouraging timely corrective actions.This revision integrates rating elements, refines risk classification, and introduces a dynamic adjustment mechanism, creating a more precise supervisory framework for financial leasing companies. It reflects a “risk-based” regulatory philosophy. The addition of the information technology management dimension aligns with the trend of digital transformation, while the tiered and categorized supervision, along with the observation period mechanism, strikes a balance between risk prevention and the development needs of institutions.3. NFRA Issued the Interim Measures for the Supervision and Administration of Microfinance Companies
The NFRA issued theInterim Measures for the Supervision and Administration of Microfinance Companies (“Microfinance Company Supervision Measures”), aiming to regulate the operations of microfinance companies (including online microfinance companies), strengthen supervision, mitigate risks, and promote the healthy development of the industry. The key provisions are as follows:（1）Loan Concentration and Limits: The loan balance of a microfinance company to a single borrower must not exceed 10% of its net assets at the end of the previous year, and the loan balance to a single borrower and its related parties must not exceed 15%. For online microfinance companies, the maximum limit for individual consumer loans is RMB 200,000, and the maximum limit for production and business loans is RMB 10 million, emphasizing the inclusive finance principle of “small-scale and diversified” lending. （2）Strengthened Management of Partner Institutions: Core business functions such as credit review and risk control must not be outsourced. Microfinance companies are prohibited from partnering with institutions that lack lending qualifications to issue loans. For online loans jointly issued with commercial banks, the microfinance company’s contribution to each loan must not be less than 30%. Partner institutions’ websites, apps, and other platforms must be legally registered, and an admission mechanism with a whitelist system must be established. （3）Prohibited Practices: It is strictly forbidden to lease or lend licenses or provide “channels” for unqualified entities. Microfinance companies must not use pre-deposited guarantee funds from partner institutions to issue loans. Practices such as violent debt collection and inducing excessive borrowing are explicitly prohibited.（4）Financing Leverage Limits: The balance of non-standard financing (e.g., bank loans, shareholder loans) must not exceed 1x the net assets at the end of the previous year. The balance of standardized financing (e.g., bonds, asset securitization) must not exceed 4x the net assets. Shareholder loans must come from self-owned funds, and bond issuance requires meeting conditions such as profitability for three consecutive fiscal years. （5）Enhanced Risk Management: Loans overdue for more than 90 days must be classified as non-performing loans. Loan funds must be managed through dedicated accounts, and personal accounts must not be used for fund operations. Online microfinance loans must be fully processed online, with a data-driven risk control system in place.（6）Improved Consumer Protection: Practices such as upfront fee deductions, bundled sales, and setting loans as default payment options are prohibited. Marketing and promotional activities must comply with strict standards, avoiding misleading claims such as “low thresholds” or “low interest rates.” Companies must ensure customers’ right to information and protect their data security.The issuance of the Microfinance Company Supervision Measures marks the beginning of a “strict supervision” era for the microfinance industry. By defining business boundaries, limiting financing leverage, and refining risk management practices, the measures systematically address regulatory gaps and strengthen oversight of the sector.4. CSRC Issued the Basic Rules for Administrative Penalty Discretion of the CSRC
On January 17, 2025, the CSRC issued theBasic Rules for Administrative Penalty Discretion of the CSRC (“Discretion Rules”), which will take effect on March 1, 2025. The Discretion Rules aim to unify enforcement standards, regulate the exercise of discretionary power, and enhance the transparency and fairness of capital market regulation. The key provisions are as follows:（1）Clarification of Discretionary Levels and Applicable Circumstances: The Discretion Rules divide administrative penalties into six levels of discretion: no penalty, exemption from penalty, mitigation of penalty, lenient penalty, general penalty, and aggravated penalty, with detailed conditions for each level. （2）Detailed Penalty Rules and Responsibility Allocation: For joint violations, the principle of “overall determination first, followed by individual penalties” is adopted, with responsibility allocated based on the roles and contributions of participants. However, if specific laws provide independent penalty provisions (e.g., controlling shareholders directing fraudulent issuance), those provisions will apply. Factors such as position, level of knowledge, and performance of duties are comprehensively considered when determining penalties for responsible personnel within an entity. Fines for independent violations are calculated cumulatively, adhering to the principle of “no double punishment for the same offense.”（3）Coordination Between Administrative and Criminal Penalties: In cases where administrative penalties precede criminal penalties, any confiscated illegal gains or fines imposed must be documented when transferring the case to judicial authorities. In cases where criminal penalties precede administrative penalties, no additional fines will be imposed if a criminal fine has already been issued. If criminal penalties are exempted but administrative penalties are still required, they will be imposed in accordance with the law.（4）Supervision and Decision-Making Mechanisms: For complex or major violations, decisions must be collectively discussed by CSRC leadership. If applying the rules would result in obvious unfairness or if circumstances change, approval from the CSRC’s principal leadership is required. The CSRC will strengthen supervision over the exercise of penalty discretion by its regional offices to ensure consistent enforcement.The Discretion Rules significantly enhance the transparency and predictability of administrative penalties by quantifying discretionary standards and refining the classification of circumstances.5. CSRC Issued the Opinions on the Application of Securities and Futures Laws No. 19—Interpretation of Articles 13 and 14 of the Administrative Measures for the Acquisition of Listed Companies
On January 10, 2025, the CSRC issued theOpinions on the Application of Securities and Futures Laws No. 19 - Interpretation of Articles 13 and 14 of the Administrative Measures for the Acquisition of Listed Companies (“Opinions on Article 13 and 14”).According to theAdministrative Measures for the Acquisition of Listed Companies (“Acquisition Measures”), when an investor and its concerted parties hold 5% or more of a listed company’s shares, any subsequent increase or decrease in their shareholding by 5% must be reported and disclosed. During the period from the occurrence of such a fact to three days after the disclosure, the investor is prohibited from trading the shares of the listed company. Before the issuance of the Opinions on Article 13 and 14, there were two interpretations in practice regarding the disclosure and trading suspension requirements: (1) Suspension and disclosure were required when the shareholding ratio reached 5% and its multiples (e.g., 10%, 15%, 20%, 25%, 30%). (2) Suspension and disclosure were required when the shareholding ratio increased or decreased by 5% (e.g., from 6% to 11% or from 12% to 7%). The Opinions on Article 13 and 14 clarify that the first interpretation should be adopted. Specifically, investors must suspend trading, report, and disclose when their shareholding ratio reaches 5%, 10%, 15%, and other multiples of 5%.Additionally, theOpinions on Article 13 and 14 specify the following: The term “reaching 5%” includes both cases where the shareholding ratio increases to 5% and decreases to 5%. Investors are exempt from disclosure obligations if their shareholding ratio passively reaches a disclosure threshold due to changes in the listed company, such as share issuance, capital reduction, or debt-to-equity conversion. For violations that occurred before the implementation of the Opinions on Article 13 and 14 but are discovered afterward, the principle of “applying the old rules while adopting leniency” will be followed to distinguish between old and new regulations.The Opinions on Article 13 and 14 provide detailed guidance on the application of Articles 13 and 14 of the Acquisition Measures, offering clear reporting instructions for investors when their shareholding ratios change. It resolves discrepancies in practice regarding disclosure standards for shareholding increases or decreases and clarifies the circumstances requiring trading suspension and reporting. Furthermore, the inclusion of exemption clauses and the emphasis on the principle of “applying the old rules while adopting leniency” reflect the reasonableness and flexibility of the regulatory approach, enhancing the clarity and operability of the legal framework.6. The State Council Issued the Regulations on Standardizing the Services Provided by Intermediary Institutions for Companies’ Public Issuance of Stocks
On January 10, 2025, the State Council issued the Regulations on Standardizing the Services Provided by Intermediary Institutions for Companies’ Public Issuance of Stocks (“Regulations on Intermediary Institutions”), which came into effect on February 15, 2025. The key provisions are as follows: （1）Scope of Application: The regulations apply to the services provided by intermediary institutions such as securities companies, accounting firms, and law firms for domestic companies conducting public stock offerings within China. （2）Prohibition of Participation in Illegal Activities and Information Disclosure Obligations: Intermediary institutions are prohibited from assisting issuers in engaging in financial fraud, fraudulent issuance, or illegal information disclosure. Documents issued by intermediary institutions must not contain false records, misleading statements, or material omissions. Issuers are required to disclose detailed information about intermediary service fees, including standards, amounts, and payment arrangements, in their prospectuses or other relevant documents. （3）Fee Standards: Fees must be determined reasonably based on workload and resource input and must be explicitly stipulated in contracts. Securities companies’ sponsorship services and accounting firms’ auditing services must not tie fees to the results of stock issuance, listing, or audit outcomes. Law firms must adopt unified fee standards in compliance with regulations set by the State Council’s judicial administrative departments. Intermediary institutions are prohibited from charging fees outside of contracts, circumventing regulatory fee adjustments, or seeking improper benefits through equity participation, listing rewards, or other means. （4）Regulatory Measures: Regulatory authorities, including securities regulators, financial authorities, and judicial administrative departments, will collaborate to supervise intermediary institutions. Joint inspections may be conducted when necessary, and violations will be investigated and punished in accordance with the law. Local governments are prohibited from providing rewards to issuers or intermediary institutions based on stock listing results. Any illegal rewards must be recovered, and accountability will be pursued. The Regulations on Intermediary Institutions systematically standardize the service behavior of intermediary institutions by clarifying professional boundaries, enhancing fee transparency, and establishing a multi-department collaborative regulatory framework. These measures aim to curb financial fraud, improper benefit transfers, and other irregularities, thereby improving the credibility of the capital market. Following the implementation of the regulations, intermediary institutions will need to comprehensively revise contract terms and strengthen internal compliance controls to avoid significant penalties and reputational risks.
1. CFCO, CSRC, MOF, MHRSS, PBC, and NFRA Jointly Issued the Implementation Plan for Promoting the Entry of Medium- and Long-Term Funds into the Market
In January 2025, the CFCO and other institutions jointly issued theImplementation Plan for Promoting the Entry of Medium- and Long-Term Funds into the Market (“Implementation Plan”), focusing on guiding medium- and long-term funds (such as commercial insurance funds, the National Social Security Fund, basic pension funds, enterprise annuities, occupational annuities, and public funds) to further increase their participation in the capital market. The key highlights are as follows:（1）A comprehensive long-term performance evaluation system of three years or more will be implemented for state-owned insurance companies. The weight of the current year’s return on net assets in the evaluation will not exceed 30%, while the weight of three- to five-year cycle indicators will be no less than 60%. （2）Gradually increase the proportion of equity asset investments by the National Social Security Fund. Encourage regions with favorable conditions to further expand the entrusted investment scale of basic pension funds. Establish detailed long-term performance evaluation mechanisms for the National Social Security Fund (over five years) and basic pension funds (over three years), supporting the National Council for Social Security Fund in leveraging its professional investment expertise. （3）Guide listed companies to increase the scale of share buybacks and implement policies for multiple dividend distributions within a year. Promote the use of refinancing tools such as share buybacks and equity increases by listed companies. Allow public funds, commercial insurance funds, basic pension funds, enterprise annuities, occupational annuities, and bank wealth management products to participate as strategic investors in private placements by listed companies. Provide equal policy treatment for bank wealth management, insurance asset management, and public funds in areas such as IPO subscriptions, private placements by listed companies, and shareholding increase recognition standards. Further expand the scale of swap facilities between securities, fund, and insurance companies to enhance operational convenience.2. Recent Key Disciplinary Cases by the AMAC
In January 2025, the AMAC issued over 20 disciplinary cases, among which the following are noteworthy: （1）Case No. AMAC Disciplinary [2024] 495: The fund manager received a warning from AMAC for two violations: First, the manager failed to truthfully report the fact that it had accepted a mandate to hold equity on behalf of a digital company, resulting in discrepancies between the product filing information and the actual situation. Second, the manager failed to promptly report changes to shareholder information, registered address, and office location to AMAC, violating relevant regulations.（2）Case No. AMAC Disciplinary [2024] 483: AMAC determined, based on the bank transaction records of the fund product’s custodial account, that in July 2018, the fund product acquired equity in an information technology company held by the fund manager’s shareholder. This was deemed a direct transaction between private fund assets and related parties of the fund manager. The manager failed to submit an interim report on this related-party transaction and did not disclose it in the 2018 annual report. The manager argued that the shareholder participated in the subscription of the fund product solely as an investor and that the transaction did not constitute a related-party transaction under private equity fund regulations. However, AMAC rejected this defense. （3）Case No. AMAC Disciplinary [2024] 506: The fund manager admitted that it had failed to conduct the required suitability verification process for certain investors. The manager argued that it had not marketed or promoted the private fund to unspecified persons. The investors in question were former colleagues and long-time friends of the manager’s operational staff, and the transactions were personal lending relationships among specific individuals. The manager requested leniency in disciplinary actions on this basis. However, AMAC ultimately did not accept this reasoning.Source of Information:
● https://www.nfra.gov.cn/cn/view/pages/ItemDetail.html?docId=1195501&itemId=915&generaltype=0● https://www.nfra.gov.cn/cn/view/pages/ItemDetail.html?docId=1196824&itemId=915&generaltype=0● https://www.nfra.gov.cn/cn/view/pages/ItemDetail.html?docId=1195504&itemId=915&generaltype=0● http://www.csrc.gov.cn/csrc/c100028/c7534325/content.shtml● http://www.csrc.gov.cn/csrc/c100028/c7532784/content.shtml● http://www.csrc.gov.cn/csrc/c100028/c7533734/content.shtml● http://www.pbc.gov.cn/goutongjiaoliu/113456/113469/5574170/index.html● https://www.gov.cn/zhengce/202501/content_7000850.htm● https://www.amac.org.cn/zlgl/jlcf/scfjg/202501/P020250117623636136223.pdf● https://www.amac.org.cn/zlgl/jlcf/scfjg/202501/P020250110622329092994.pdf● https://www.amac.org.cn/zlgl/jlcf/scfjg/202501/P020250124625060066184.pdf
京公網安備110105011258
