China's revised Anti-Unfair Competition Law (AUCL), passed on 27 June 2025 and effective 15 October 2025, now explicitly targets organized fake transactions and fake reviews, with fines historically ranging from RMB 20,000 to RMB 2 million and no statutory minimum under the new regime.
Quick Facts
| Metric | Value |
|---|---|
| Law name | Anti-Unfair Competition Law of the PRC (AUCL), 2025 revision |
| Passed | 27 June 2025, 16th session of the 14th NPC Standing Committee (Presidential Order No. 50) |
| Effective date | 15 October 2025 |
| Structure | 5 chapters, 41 articles |
| Core prohibition (Art. 8) | No false or misleading commercial promotion; no organizing fake transactions or fake evaluations |
| Penalty range (2019 version, Art. 20) | RMB 200,000–1,000,000; serious cases RMB 1,000,000–2,000,000 plus possible license revocation |
| 2025 change | Statutory minimum fine of RMB 200,000 removed for false promotion |
| Platform record-keeping | Records of online unfair competition kept at least 3 years (Interim Provisions, effective 1 Sept 2024) |
| Parallel liability | E-Commerce Law fines of RMB 50,000–200,000 (serious: 200,000–500,000) |
| Extraterritorial reach | 2025 AUCL Art. 40 covers conduct abroad disturbing the domestic market |
What Does the Law Actually Prohibit?
The AUCL's Article 8 contains two distinct prohibitions. Paragraph 1 bars businesses from making false or misleading commercial promotion about performance, functions, quality, sales status, user reviews or honors received, in a way that deceives or misleads consumers or other operators. Paragraph 2 bars helping other operators conduct such promotion by organizing fake transactions — the classic "brushing" (shuadan) model. Both paragraphs appear in the 2019 AUCL text published by CNIPA.
The 2025 revision sharpened both teeth. The scope of protected parties expanded from "consumers" to "consumers or other operators," extending Article 8 into B2B contexts, and paragraph 2 now expressly covers "organizing fake transactions" and "organizing fake evaluations." You can read the full 2025 AUCL text via the Ministry of Commerce legal database.
What Changed in the 2025 Revision?
The 2025 amendment is the most significant overhaul since 2019, and several changes matter directly for anyone selling online in China. The Legislative Affairs Commission of the NPC Standing Committee, in remarks reported by the Supreme People's Court IP Tribunal, confirmed that the statutory minimum fine of RMB 200,000 for false promotion was removed, allowing proportionate penalties for minor violations.
| 2025 AUCL Change | Practical Effect |
|---|---|
| B2B coverage (Art. 8) | False claims about sales or reviews can now mislead "other operators," not just consumers |
| Organized fake evaluations added | Agencies and service providers arranging fake reviews face direct liability |
| Fine floor removed | Minor first-time violations may attract lower fines than the old RMB 200,000 minimum |
| Extraterritorial application (Art. 40) | Conduct abroad that disturbs China's market order falls under the law |
| Regulatory interviews (Art. 18) | Authorities may summon responsible persons to explain and propose corrective measures |
| Platform obligations (Art. 21) | Platforms must embed fair-competition rules and report violations by in-platform sellers |
| Civil damages (Art. 22) | Damages calculated on actual loss or infringer's gains, including reasonable expenses |
| Whistleblower system (Art. 20) | Anyone may report violations; authorities must protect informant identity |
The revision also raised penalty ceilings for commercial secret infringement, commercial defamation and online unfair competition, per the NPC Legislative Affairs Commission commentary. The law's five-chapter, 41-article structure is set out in the official full text.
What Counts as a Fake Review Under Chinese Rules?
The Interim Provisions on Curbing Unfair Competition Online (SAMR Order No. 91, effective 1 September 2024) enumerate three categories of prohibited fake-evaluation conduct. These rules apply to "consumers or the relevant public," which is the regulatory basis for B2B enforcement.
| Prohibited Conduct | Examples |
|---|---|
| Fabricating user reviews | Writing or commissioning reviews for products never purchased |
| Misleading display of reviews | Hiding negative reviews, placing positive reviews first, or failing to clearly separate reviews of different products |
| Inducing designated positive reviews | Cash rebates, red envelopes or coupons in exchange for specified positive reviews, likes or targeted voting |
The same Interim Provisions require platforms to retain records related to online unfair competition for no fewer than three years — meaning a brushing arrangement from 2024 can still surface in a 2027 investigation.
What Are the Penalties?
Penalties stack across three statutes. Under the 2019 AUCL (the version applicable to pre-October 2025 conduct), false promotion carried fines of RMB 200,000–1,000,000, rising to RMB 1,000,000–2,000,000 with possible license revocation in serious cases, per CNIPA's published text. Where the conduct constitutes false advertising, penalties follow the Advertising Law instead.
| Statute | Conduct | Penalty Range |
|---|---|---|
| AUCL 2019, Art. 20 | False or misleading promotion | RMB 200,000–1,000,000; serious: 1,000,000–2,000,000 + possible license revocation |
| AUCL 2025 | False promotion (floor removed) | No statutory minimum; ceilings adjusted upward for related conduct |
| Advertising Law, Art. 55 | False advertising | 3–5× advertising fee; if fee cannot be determined or is clearly low: RMB 200,000–1,000,000; repeat/serious: 5–10× fee or RMB 1,000,000–2,000,000 + possible revocation |
| E-Commerce Law, Arts. 17 & 77 | Fictitious transactions or fabricated reviews | Confiscation of illegal gains + RMB 50,000–200,000; serious: 200,000–500,000 |
The Advertising Law's Article 55 ladder and the E-Commerce Law provisions in the national legal database both apply in parallel — regulators typically apply the heavier applicable penalty. Where a violation involves publishing false advertisements, the AUCL expressly defers to the Advertising Law (2019 AUCL, Art. 20(2)).
Which Enforcement Cases Show How This Works in Practice?
Regulators have published a steady stream of typical cases. The most instructive recent example is the Shanghai Panming Mechanical & Electrical case: between January 2021 and December 2022 the company commissioned a third party to fabricate more than 20,000 orders to inflate transaction volume; in January 2025 the Qingpu District market regulator ordered it to stop and fined it RMB 80,000, as recorded in SAMR's 2025 typical cases compilation.
| Case | Conduct | Outcome |
|---|---|---|
| Shanghai Panming (2025) | 20,000+ fabricated orders via third party, 2021–2022 | Ordered to stop; RMB 80,000 fine (Qingpu District, Jan 2025) |
| Xiamen app-download case (2021) | Employees purchased own font products to fake 2.9667 million yuan in downloads | RMB 250,000 fine under Art. 8(1) |
| Xiamen brushing-service case (2021) | Collected RMB 735,100 in commissions to fake downloads; also unlicensed | RMB 200,000 fine under Art. 8(2) |
| Foshan advance-payment case (2021) | 121 self-purchased orders with advance payments and commissions totaling RMB 35,600 | RMB 50,000 fine under Art. 8(2) |
| Tmall store case (2021) | 165 fictitious transactions worth RMB 19,200 via a brushing agency | RMB 25,000 fine under Art. 8(1) |
| Kaiping red-envelope case | Cash red envelopes inducing false positive reviews | RMB 200,000 fine under Art. 8(1) |
| Kaiping fake Q&A case | Third parties posing as real users posting simulated-experience Q&A | RMB 1,300,000 fine under Art. 8(2), plus RMB 200,000 for false promotion |
The Xiamen, Foshan and Tmall cases were among ten typical cases announced by the State Administration for Market Regulation (SAMR) in July 2021; the Kaiping cases are documented by the Kaiping municipal regulator. Note that the pre-2025 cases were decided under the 2019 AUCL, which carried the RMB 200,000 minimum — one reason several fines cluster at or above that floor.
How Should a Foreign Seller Build a Compliance Framework?
Our advisory team recommends a five-step framework before and after launch. The goal is not merely avoiding fines but protecting account health, since platforms now carry their own reporting duties under the 2025 AUCL.
- Audit current marketing claims. Review all product listings, banners and store copy for performance, quality, sales-volume or review claims that cannot be substantiated — the exact categories listed in AUCL Article 8.
- Screen agency and MCN contracts. Confirm that no service provider is commissioned to generate orders, reviews, likes or Q&A content; organized fake evaluations are now expressly prohibited under the 2025 AUCL.
- Eliminate rebate-for-review schemes. Cash red envelopes, coupons or gifts tied to positive reviews fall within the Interim Provisions' third prohibited category and have drawn direct fines.
- Align platform operations with fair-competition rules. Platforms must now embed fair-competition clauses in their agreements and report seller violations; assume any brushing activity will be escalated, per 2025 AUCL Art. 21.
- Document remediation capacity. Under the leniency provisions carried into the 2025 law, operators who voluntarily eliminate or mitigate harm receive lighter or reduced penalties, and minor violations corrected promptly with no harmful consequences may escape administrative punishment entirely (2019 AUCL Art. 25, continued in 2025).
What to Watch Out For
Extraterritorial exposure. The 2025 AUCL's Article 40 extends the law to conduct outside China that disturbs the domestic market order or harms domestic operators and consumers (official text). Overseas marketing agencies working on China-facing campaigns are no longer safely out of reach.
Credit records and publicity. Any administrative penalty is entered into the credit record and publicly disclosed under AUCL Article 26 (2019). For foreign brands, a public penalty record can affect platform standing, banking relationships and partner due diligence.
Whistleblower and interview mechanisms. Anyone — including competitors, employees or customers — may report violations, and authorities must keep informant identities confidential while notifying named informants of outcomes (2025 AUCL Art. 20). Regulators may also summon company representatives for formal interviews (Art. 18).
Platform record retention. Platforms keep unfair-competition records for at least three years (Interim Provisions), so historical conduct remains discoverable well after the fact.
Civil claims by competitors. Under the 2025 AUCL's Article 22, injured operators may claim damages based on actual loss or the violator's gains, including reasonable expenses (official text). A competitor harmed by your inflated sales figures can sue directly.
Frequently Asked Questions
Q: What is the anti unfair competition china fake reviews rule in simple terms?
A: China's AUCL Article 8 prohibits false or misleading promotion of user reviews and prohibits organizing fake transactions or fake evaluations. The 2025 revision, effective 15 October 2025, extended coverage to B2B contexts and added organized fake evaluations as an express violation.
Q: Are fake reviews illegal in China even if I did not write them myself?
A: Yes. Organizing fake evaluations — commissioning an agency or MCN to generate them — is now expressly prohibited under the 2025 AUCL. The Kaiping fake Q&A case resulted in a RMB 1,300,000 fine for a service provider that posted simulated user experiences on behalf of clients.
Q: What is the typical fine for brushing orders?
A: Under the 2019 AUCL, fines ranged from RMB 200,000 to 1,000,000, with serious cases reaching 1,000,000–2,000,000 plus possible license revocation. The 2025 revision removed the RMB 200,000 floor, so minor violations may now attract lower fines — the Shanghai Panming case drew RMB 80,000 for over 20,000 fake orders.
Q: Can I be penalized under more than one law for the same conduct?
A: Yes. Fictitious transactions and fabricated reviews violate both the AUCL and the E-Commerce Law, which carries fines of RMB 50,000–200,000 (serious: 200,000–500,000) plus confiscation of illegal gains. Where conduct constitutes false advertising, the Advertising Law's 3–5× fee penalty applies.
Q: Does the law apply to conduct outside China?
A: Yes. The 2025 AUCL's Article 40 extends the law to unfair competition committed abroad that disturbs China's market order or harms domestic operators or consumers. Overseas agencies running China-facing review campaigns should assume the law reaches them.
Q: What about cash rebates for positive reviews?
A: Prohibited. The Interim Provisions on Curbing Unfair Competition Online (effective 1 September 2024) list cash rebates, red envelopes and coupons inducing designated positive reviews, likes or targeted voting as a distinct violation. A Kaiping case resulted in a RMB 200,000 fine for exactly this practice.
Q: How long do platforms keep records of my store's transactions?
A: Platforms must retain records related to online unfair competition for no fewer than three years under the Interim Provisions. Combined with the 2025 AUCL's platform duty to report seller violations, historical brushing activity can surface in an investigation years later.
Q: Is there any leniency for first-time or minor violations?
A: Yes. Operators who voluntarily eliminate or mitigate harmful consequences receive lighter or reduced penalties, and violations that are minor, promptly corrected and cause no harm may escape administrative punishment entirely. The 2025 revision also removed the RMB 200,000 fine floor, enabling proportionate penalties for minor cases.
Q: Can competitors sue me over fake reviews?
A: Yes. The 2025 AUCL's Article 22 allows injured operators to claim civil damages calculated on actual loss or the violator's gains from the infringement, including reasonable expenses. A competitor harmed by your inflated sales figures or fabricated reviews can bring a direct civil claim.
Q: How can CnBusinessHub help with review and promotion compliance?
A: Our advisory team can help you evaluate your current marketing claims, screen agency contracts for brushing or fake-review exposure, and coordinate with qualified local counsel on remediation if issues arise. We have guided 1,500+ foreign enterprises across 16+ Chinese cities since 2019.
Conclusion
Three takeaways for foreign sellers:
- The 2025 AUCL closed the agency loophole. Organizing fake transactions and fake evaluations is now an express violation, and the law reaches conduct committed outside China that disturbs the domestic market.
- Penalties are flexible but layered. The RMB 200,000 floor is gone, but AUCL, E-Commerce Law and Advertising Law penalties can apply in parallel, and penalty records enter the public credit system.
- Platforms are now enforcement multipliers. With duties to embed fair-competition rules and report violations, plus three-year record retention, brushing arrangements are more likely than ever to be escalated.
For personalized guidance on your China e-commerce licensing pathway, contact the CnBusinessHub advisory team at consult@CnBusinessHub.com to book a consultation.
Written by the CnBusinessHub Advisory Team, China market-entry advisors since 2019 — 1,500+ foreign enterprises guided across 16+ cities.
Last updated: 2026-10-11 | Next review: April 2027
Sources
- Anti-Unfair Competition Law of the PRC (2025 Revision, Presidential Order No. 50) — Ministry of Commerce Global Legal Database
- Anti-Unfair Competition Law of the PRC (2019 Amendment) — China National Intellectual Property Administration
- Anti-Unfair Competition Law Revision Completed: NPC Legislative Affairs Commission Q&A — Supreme People's Court IP Tribunal
- Interim Provisions on Curbing Unfair Competition Online (SAMR Order No. 91) — Tengchong Municipal Market Regulation Bureau
- SAMR 2025 Typical Cases of Unfair Competition Enforcement — State Administration for Market Regulation
- Typical Cases of False Promotion and Commercial Defamation — Kaiping Municipal Market Regulation Bureau
- E-Commerce Law of the PRC — National Laws and Regulations Database
- Advertising Law of the PRC (2015 Revision), Article 55 — Hebei Provincial Department of Culture and Tourism
Related Reading
- Consumer Protection Law and Social Commerce in 2026 — China Compliance Guide
- 10 Visual Clues to Spot a Fake Alibaba Supplier Profile — 2026 Guide
Disclaimer
This article is written by the CnBusinessHub team for informational and educational purposes only.
The content of this article does not constitute any form of investment advice, business advice, or legal opinion. Readers should exercise their own judgment regarding the applicability of the information and should consult qualified professionals before making any business decisions.
The data and information cited in this article are sourced from public channels. While we strive for accuracy, we do not guarantee the completeness or timeliness of the information. Policies and regulations may change at any time; please verify the latest information before taking action.
© 2026 CnBusinessHub. All rights reserved.
