National Development and Reform Commission Archives

China Laws and Regulations Update in April 2015

Posted on April 30, 2015 by yytbest

The National Development and Reform Commission and the Ministry of Commerce Publish the Catalogue of Industries for Foreign Investment (2015 Revised Edition)

On the 10th March 2015, the National Development and Reform Commission and the Ministry of Commerce of the PRC published the Catalogue of Industries for Guiding Foreign Investment (2015 Revised Edition) (“Catalogue”) under the approval by the State Council of the PRC. The Catalogue will become effective on the 10th of April 2015.

The Catalogue totally contains 432 items, from which 48 items of the 471 items totally contained in the 2011 Edition, have been eliminated. Among those eliminated items, 41 ones are under the restricted class, 5 under the priority class and 2 under the prohibited class. In addition, the number of items “limited to joint investment and cooperation” in the Catalogue is 15, decreased from 43 in the 2011 Edition and the number of items applicable only to “Chinese controlled businesses” in the Catalogue is 35, decreased from 44 in the 2011 Edition.

China Laws and Regulations Update in December 2014

Posted on January 6, 2015 by yytbest

The State Council Releases the Catalogue of Investment Projects Subject to Government Verification and Approval (2014 Edition)

On 31st of October 2014, the State Council released the Notice of the State Council on Promulgating the Catalogue of Investment Projects Subject to Government Verification and Approval (2014 Edition), which became effective on the same date.

Enterprises that intend to invest in and construct the fixed-asset investment projects listed in the Catalogue shall apply to relevant project verification and approval authorities for verification and approval in accordance with pertinent provisions. Enterprises that intend to invest in and construct projects other than those listed in the Catalogue shall be subject to record-filing administration. Projects invested and constructed by public institutions, social organizations, etc. shall be governed by the Catalogue.

Judgment Abstract on NDRC’s Administrative Decision of Zhejiang Insurance Association in China

Posted on September 20, 2014 by yytbest

(By You Yunting) By reports, recently, National Development and Reform Commission (the “NDRC”) investigated the industry group the Zhejiang Insurance Association and its membership insurers, originated from that the Zhejiang Insurance Association in violation of the Anti-Monopoly Law organized its 23 membership insurers to agree on unified commissions from auto insurance premiums through meetings. The NDRC fined 22 of the insurers a total of RMB 110 million. Today, we will introduce the NDRC’s Punishment Decision on Zhejiang Insurance Association and make some comments.

Judgment Abstract on NDRC’s Administrative Anti-Monopoly Decision of PICC Zhejiang Branch’s Impunity in China

Posted on September 15, 2014 by yytbest

(By You Yunting) By reports, recently, National Development and Reform Commission (the “NDRC”) investigated the industry group the Zhejiang Insurance Association and its membership insurers, originated from that the Zhejiang Insurance Association in violation of the Anti-Monopoly Law organized its 23 membership insurers to agree on unified commissions from auto insurance premiums through meetings. The NDRC fined 22 of the insurers a total of RMB 110 million, with PICC Property and Casualty Company Limited Zhejiang Branch, an insurer, escaping punishment because of informing the authorities and providing key evidence. In today’s post, we will introduce the decision on PICC Property and Casualty Company Limited Zhejiang Branch escaping punishment and make comments.

Ctrip was Fined RMB 1.5 Million by China NDRC for Imposing Train Ticket Insurance

Posted on January 27, 2014 by yytbest

(By You Yunting) Recently it is at the peak passenger flow of Chinese Lunar Spring Festival in China. Billions of people would take train back hometown. Therefore, Chinese governments enhanced its suppression and punishment to illegal acts relevant to train tickets purchase. The day before yesterday, the Chinese National Development and Reform Commission published a notice (note: the link is in Chinese):

Some companies, who sell airline tickets and train tickets but who had raised arbitrary fees and prices at the peak passenger flow, were got severe punishment. Tieyou.com under Ctrip.com was fined 1.5 million yuan due to its imposing an insurance fee counting from 10 to 20 yuan in selling train tickets. Now Tieyou. Com accepts such punishment and changes compulsory insurance purchase into an optional one.

The Chinese Automotive Industry is a Hotbed for Systematic Vertical Monopoly

Posted on August 20, 2013 by yytbest

Abstract: Current regulations, created by ministries and commissions such as the National Development and Reform Commission (“NDRC”), formulate that automobile distribution should follow the hierarchy from sole distributor to brand distributors. This is to prevent in-fighting within the individual brand, however, the results is a legal hotbed for monopoly practices to eliminate or restrict competition.

(By You Yunting) According to Media’s reports, China Automobile Dealers Association (the “CADA”) recently confirmed that the CADA is actively cooperating with the NDRC’s anti-monopoly investigation. But a senior executive of CADA explained that the investigation is aimed at whether automobile manufacturing enterprises fixed the minimum sale prices to distributors, not about the issue of high profit of imported automobiles into China. Setting a high price for import automobiles is a business decision, and does not constitute as a monopoly conduct.

NDRC should Further Improve the Transparency of Administrative Law Enforcement on Price Monopoly.

Posted on August 18, 2013 by yytbest

Abstract: Five Shanghai gold retailers fined for price manipulation because although they were supposed to be competing with each other, the retailers conspired to fix the price, which constitutes as a horizontal monopoly, a clear violation of the Anti-Monopoly Law. The reason behind the five gold retailers’ fines is that their practices of horizontal monopoly caused more severe harm to consumer’s legal interest and social orders than that of previous vertical monopoly on limitation of resale prices made by Mao Tai, Wu Liang Ye, and six milk powder manufacturers. However, what is puzzling about this fine is that the punishments for this horizontal monopoly violation made by the NDRC were inferior to that of vertical monopoly violation.

Why Did the Court Not Rule in Accordance With Article 14 of the Anti Monopoly Law? Part II

Posted on August 8, 2013 by yytbest

(By You Yunting) August 1, 2013 was the fifth anniversary of the enactment of China’s Anti–Monopoly Law. On the same day, Shanghai Higher People’s Courts handed down the first decision that supported a plaintiff’s claim in an anti-monopoly civil ligation in China. The court determined that Johnson & Johnson Medical Co. Ltd action constituted as a vertical monopoly for restricting the minimum sales price, and the company was ordered to make civil compensation for the plaintiff’s loss.

Full Text of NDRC’s Public Announcement on Milk Powder Manufactures’ Vertical Monopoly of Price Control

Posted on August 7, 2013 by yytbest

(By You Yunting) According to the latest announcement on Chinese National Development and Reform Commission website, NDRC’s carried out anti-monopoly investigations into milk powder manufacturers and imposed fines. Based on this announcement, we found that there are different views between NDRC and Chinese courts on the understanding of Article 14 of the Anti Monopoly Law. With regard to the court’s understanding that milk powder formula in this case is effective competitive, the milk powder manufacturers shall not the determined as violating the the Anti Monopoly Law even if they conducted price control. Following is our translation for this public announcement.

Why Did the Court Not Rule in Accordance With Article 14 of the Anti Monopoly Law? Part I

Posted on August 7, 2013 by yytbest

Why the Anti-Monopoly Law Can’t Cut Price of Infant Milk Formula in China?

Posted on August 6, 2013 by yytbest

(By You Yunting) According to media reports, China’s National Development and Reform Commission (“NDRC”)’s anti-monopoly investigation into infant milk formula discovered that nine milk powder manufacturers, including Wyeth, announced one after another in early July that they would lower their prices, with an average discount of 11%. At the same time, Wyeth canceled its earlier decision to raise the price of Wyeth S-26 Progress GOLD product, a new product by 4 percent. Some consumers told reporters that salesclerks would first recommend Wyeth S-26 Progress GOLD product, and would only bring out the discounted, original milk formula when asked by the consumer with regards to the discount. The following points should be look at more carefully:

Would NDRC’s Vertical Pricing Monopoly Fine against MaoTai and WuLiangYe Have Influences on Other China Companies?

Posted on February 25, 2013 by yytbest

(By You Yunting) Over the past few days, the writer shared two essays concerning the administrative punishment ordered against Mao Tai Company and Wu Liang Ye Company, the top distilleries in China, over the accusation that they violated the Anti Monopoly Law by concluding monopoly agreements restricting or fixing retail prices (the “monopoly agreements”) with their dealers. The writer has received heated comments and arguments from the subscribers and followers of his Weibo and Blog. Many of these comments support the punishment, but some friends have expressed concerns over the issue. Today, the writer will share his opinions on whether the punishment will influence the normal commercial order.

How MaoTai and Wu Liang Ye Would Defend Against Vertical Pricing Monopoly Fines ordered by China NDRC?

Posted on February 25, 2013 by yytbest

(By You Yunting) Abstract: Both Mao Tai and Wu Liang Ye can rely on one of the seven situations in Article 15 of the Anti Monopoly Law for their defense. But, that defense will not be easy because it requires evidence that the relevant agreements will not limit market competitors and that consumers can share the interests produced by the agreements.

In yesterday’s post, the writer analyzed the legal meaning of the punishment ordered by the National Development and Reform Commission (“NDRC”) against two top Chinese distilleries, Mao Tai and Wu Liang Ye. Today’s post will go one step further to describe the way for Mao Tai and Wu Liang Ye can protect their own interests.

The Legal Sense of the Punishment over the Vertical Monopoly of Mao Tai and Wu Liang Ye By NDRC

Posted on February 21, 2013 by yytbest

(You Yunting) According to the report, Mao Tai Company and Wu Liang Ye Company, both are the top distilleries in China, would be ordered the penalty of 1% of their annual sales in 2012, approximately RMB 449 million yuan, by the National Development and Reform Commission (the “NDRC”) for their restricting or fixing the retail price of their downstream dealers. You might have noticed “would be”, and we have no idea about whether the final decision has been made, and it could not exclude the possibility that the news report is only the public opinion test by NDRC for its punishment in consideration.

Why SARFT’s Order for Price Limit on Movie Ticket Daily Deal Is Illegal?

Posted on February 28, 2012 by You Yunting

As reported, the State Administration of Radio, Film & Television (“SARFT”) has issued the Exposure Draft of “The Guideline on The Further Regulation of The Movie Tickets Management” (the “Exposure Draft”) to its affiliated industry associations, which says that the price of the member ticket, group ticket and the preferential ticket shall not be less than 70% of the listed price in the cinema. The regulation has aroused wide argument for it focusing on the heating ticket group buying business. In our opinion, the Exposure Draft is to establish the price cartel, which is suspected to violate the Price Law, Anti-trust Law and Anti Unfair Competition Law. And the following is the opinions from Bridge IP Law Commentary: (the image above is the logo of NUOMI.COM, the first daily deal website selling movie ticket in China)

Bridge IP Law Commentary

Your Guide to China IP Law！

Tag Archives: National Development and Reform Commission