GC Agenda China: April 2016 | Practical Law

GC Agenda China: April 2016 | Practical Law

A look back at the most recent legal developments for general counsel (GC) and their advisers working on China-related matters. GC Agenda China identifies and analyses the key issues that affect businesses, provides insight from leading legal practitioners and professionals, and gives specific and actionable guidance in response to these issues.

GC Agenda China: April 2016

Practical Law UK Articles 1-627-2107 (Approx. 11 pages)

GC Agenda China: April 2016

by Brad Herrold, Consultant and Practical Law China
Published on 28 Apr 2016China
A look back at the most recent legal developments for general counsel (GC) and their advisers working on China-related matters. GC Agenda China identifies and analyses the key issues that affect businesses, provides insight from leading legal practitioners and professionals, and gives specific and actionable guidance in response to these issues.
The April 2016 edition of GC Agenda China is the twenty-fifth in the series.

Speedread

A look back at the most recent legal developments for general counsel and their advisers working on China-related matters. GC Agenda China identifies and investigates the key issues affecting businesses, provides insight from leading practitioners and gives specific and actionable guidance in response to these issues.
This month's GC Agenda covers:
  • SPC draft judicial interpretation of Company Law.
  • NDRC's draft negative list for market access.
  • NDRC's draft revisions to verification and record-filing for outbound projects.
  • Charity Law enacted by NPC.
  • SPC judicial interpretation of patent infringement disputes.
  • E-commerce retail import tax raised by three ministries.
  • Two draft standards on e-commerce circulated by MOFCOM.
The April 2016 edition of GC Agenda China is the twenty-fifth in the series.

SPC issues new draft judicial interpretation on Company Law

On 12 April 2016, the Supreme People’s Court (SPC) circulated for public comment the Provisions of the Supreme People’s Court on Certain Issues concerning the Application of the Company Law of the People’s Republic of China (IV) (Draft for Public Comment). The draft would be the SPC’s fourth judicial interpretation of the Company law of the People’s Republic of China 2013 (2013 Company Law) and its first since the law was significantly revised in 2013. The draft can be viewed as an extension of a recent legislative trend toward protecting minority shareholders, consumers, employees and other vulnerable parties from parties such as majority shareholders that otherwise may exploit their dominant commercial position.
The draft interpretation is arranged by topic into five sets of articles that address, respectively:
  • The validity of resolutions adopted by a company’s governing body, that is, the shareholders’ meeting, general assembly or board of directors.
  • A shareholder's "right to know", that is, the rights of shareholders to inspect and copy corporate documents and materials.
  • Certain procedures for enforcing a shareholder’s right to claim a distribution of profit..
  • The enforcement of pre-emptive rights, that is, a shareholder’s right of first refusal over an equity interest offered for sale by another shareholder to a third party.
  • Certain procedural issues related to derivative suits.
Comments on the draft judicial interpretation may be provided until 13 May 2016.
For more detailed information on each of these points, see Legal update, Supreme People's Court circulates draft of new Company Law interpretation.
For further information on the revisions to the 2013 Company Law, see Practice note, Understanding 2013 Company Law reforms: China.

Market reaction

Sherry Yin, partner, Morrison & Foerster, Beijing

"The impact of the draft interpretation depends upon the corporate form and ownership structure of a company. It does not appear that the draft would apply to a China-registered partnership, including a foreign-invested partnership, a non-legal person Sino-foreign cooperative joint venture or the shareholders of an offshore vehicle that holds a wholly foreign-owned enterprise. In addition, the impact would differ depending upon whether a shareholder holds a minority or majority stake. In particular, the provisions regarding the shareholders' right to know and right to profit distribution would largely protect minority shareholders in practice. It is worth noting that the draft appears to provide more freedom to the shareholders of a LLC and a company limited by shares to reach their own agreement in the articles of associate of a company, especially those regarding pre-emptive rights while the Company Law only provides certain principles."

Action items

Upon confirming that the draft would apply, GC should consider the following actions:
  • Compare the provisions in the draft, the 2013 Company Law and other relevant rules with the relevant provisions in the company’s articles of association (and joint venture contract, if any) to ensure that the sections on corporate governance, finance and accounting, profit distribution and share transfers are in compliance.
  • Identify the provisions in the draft and the 2013 Company Law that permit the parties to include contrary provisions, as well as the provisions in these rules that expressly prohibit the inclusion of contrary provisions, and revise the company’s constitutional documents where permitted by law and commercial considerations.
  • Confirm that the company keeps adequate corporate records, and ensure that detailed meeting minutes are recorded and signed by all shareholders and that the client keeps chopped originals of meeting minutes and resolutions in its sole possession.
  • Prepare to exploit potential opportunities to remedy abuses by majority shareholders, for example by consulting local litigation counsel and reviewing available evidence.

NDRC press conference unveils draft negative list for market access

On 12 April 2016, the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) held a press conference to publicly introduce and answer journalists' questions on the Draft Negative List for Market Access (Pilot Version), which was circulated to internal government organs by the NDRC and the Ministry of Commerce on 2 March 2016. The draft follows the Opinions on Implementing the Negative List System for Market Access, issued by the State Council in October 2015, and marks the next step in China's evolving regulatory system for market access.
The new system will introduce two negative lists, one for market access and the other for foreign investment. The negative list for market access applies equally to domestic and foreign invested businesses. No draft has yet been circulated of the negative list for foreign investment, which will set out a list of additional limitations on market access that will apply only to foreign invested businesses.
The market access negative list will be implemented on a pilot basis in four of China's provincial level administrative regions (Shanghai, Tianjin, Guangdong and Fujian). These are the same regions that contain FTZs, but the negative list will apply throughout the whole of these provinces. The draft will take effect once the four regions submit an implementation plan and that plan has been approved by the State Council.
The draft specifies 96 sectors that are prohibited and 232 sectors that are restricted for investment:
  • For prohibited sectors, business entities are denied access and no approval will be granted by any government authority for business operation.
  • For restricted sectors, the approval of government authority will be discretionary and subject to certain restrictive conditions, including qualifications requirements, requirements to obtain industry-specific operating permits, restrictions on the scope of business operations, and so on.
Businesses operating in sectors not included in the negative list are afforded free market access, subject to record-filing, information disclosure and other administrative requirements.
For further information on the Opinions on Implementing the Negative List System for Market Access, see Legal update, State Council initiates negative list approach to market access.
For further information on the negative list applicable in the pilot free trade zones, see Legal update, China publishes 2015 Negative List for FTZs.
For further information on the negative list approach generally, see Legal update, Draft Foreign Investment Law open for comment until February 17.

Market reaction

Paul McKenzie, Managing Partner, Morrison & Foerster, Beijing and Shanghai

"In and of itself, the draft negative list for market access is not tremendously ground-breaking, since it largely consolidates existing restrictions found in various regulations specific to different industries. Where the unveiling of the draft list becomes interesting is as part of the Chinese government’s broader project, as reflected in the draft Foreign Investment Law, to implement a negative list approach to the regulation of foreign investment. The balance of this year should see significant developments, including release of a draft negative list for foreign investment, which is required before the Foreign Investment Law can be promulgated, as well as negotiation of China's proposed bilateral investment treaty with the United States."

Action items

Though the negative list for market access has not taken effect and is largely a compilation of existing rules, it is expected that it will loosen market entry requirements for both domestic and foreign investors. GC and particularly GC for companies that operate in highly regulated or "sensitive" industries should keep an eye out for this and further developments, particularly the negative list for foreign investment, in the run up to the nationwide adoption of the negative list approach and the enactment of the pending China Foreign Investment Law.

NDRC circulates draft revisions to verification and record-filing for outbound projects

On 13 April 2016, the NDRC circulated the Decision on Revising the Administrative Measures for the Verification and Approval and the Record-filing of Outbound Investment Projects (Draft for Public Comments). The decision further streamlines the bifurcated verification or record-filing procedure for investments outside China by Chinese investors.
The draft revisions include:
  • Verification authority. Under the current version of the measures, outbound investment projects of USD2 billion or more which involve sensitive countries or sensitive industries require final verification by the State Council. Under the draft, the NDRC would assume responsibility for verifying any outbound project that involves a sensitive country or industry without reference to a minimum threshold amount.
  • Confirmation letter. Under the current measures, the NDRC must issue a confirmation letter before the investors may engage in "substantive work", that is, a legally binding act such as signing a contract or submitting a bid, in relation to an outbound acquisition or bidding project involving USD300 million. Under the draft, the investor still would be required to file a project information report, but would not need to obtain the confirmation letter before engaging in substantive work.
  • Bank letter of intent. In relation to a project requiring verification, the current measures require an investor to include with its project application report a letter from a bank expressing its intent to finance the project. Under the draft, this document would not be required.
  • Taiwan projects. The current measures do not apply to investment projects in Taiwan. Under the draft, the measures would apply to Taiwan projects, but the NDRC or its lower level subordinate would need to consult with the Taiwan affairs office at the corresponding level.
Comments may be submitted until 13 May 2016.

Market reaction

Li Jingyi, partner, Anli Partners, Beijing

"Any enterprise that engages in major outbound investments would prefer the proposed revision, as a "receipt" from NDRC is supposed to be more easily attainable than the "confirmation letter" as currently required. In addition, the proposed revision is investor-friendly as it exempts a potential investor of an investment that is subject to NDRC's verification from submitting a letter from a bank regarding its intention of financing."

Action items

GC for Chinese investors with potential outbound projects (including "outbound" projects in Taiwan), should become familiar with the changes in the draft. GC may consider approaching the relevant development and reform commission to enquire if the client could take advantage of any of the proposed changes in relation to an immediate challenge with a pending project, that is, before the draft takes effect.

NPC enacts Charity Law

On 16 March 2016, the National People’s Congress (NPC) enacted the Charity Law of the People’s Republic of China 2016, which will take effect 1 September 2016.
Under the new law:
  • "Charitable activities" refer to public welfare activities, including aid to the poor and needy, disaster relief and environmental protection, as well as activities promoting the development of education, science, culture, health, sports and similar causes.
  • "Charitable organisations" refer to non-profit, legally established foundations, social groups and social service organisations.
The new law contains several interesting provisions, including:
  • Charitable organisations are not required to obtain sponsorship by a professional supervisory unit of the Chinese government to register, as currently required for social organisations.
  • Existing social organisations may (but are not required to) register as charitable organisations.
  • Charitable organisations may conduct non-public fund raising activities immediately upon registration, and they may conduct public fund-raising activities after they are registered and lawfully operating for two years, provided they obtain a public fund-raising certificate and record-file a public fund-raising plan with the relevant civil affairs bureau.
  • For those funds with public fund-raising qualifications, the management costs of charitable organisations are capped, that is, they must spend no less than 70% of their donations in any year or 70% of their average donations over the past three years on charitable activities. In addition, the annual management fees incurred are also capped at 10% of the total expenditures of the given year.
  • Individuals and businesses are eligible for undefined tax preferences for their charitable donations, and businesses may carry over unused preferences (that is, where a donation exceeds the maximum allowed preference for any year) for three years.
  • Charitable organisations are subject to public disclosure obligations upon establishment, annually and in relation to specific charitable activities.

Market reaction

Liu Jinghua, partner, Baker & McKenzie, Beijing

"While this new law provides many facilitating policies to charitable organizations, some parts of the law need further clarification. For example, it does not provide a clear definition of charitable organizations and what types of existing non-profit organizations will fall within the scope of charitable organizations. It may take some time and additional work for the new policies in the law to be actually implemented."

Action items

GC for non-profits may wish to consider registering (or re-registering) as a charitable organization under the new law, especially as the new law permits more than one charitable organization to register and conduct similar activities within the same region. GC for organisations with non-profits in China also may wish to consider allying with other similar organisations for specific activities or more generally to form professional associations. GC for registered charities should ensure that the China entity adheres to the cap on management costs and performs its public disclosure obligations.

SPC issues judicial interpretation on patent infringement disputes

On 21 March 2016, the SPC held a press conference to discuss the Interpretation on Several Issues concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Cases involving Patent Infringement Disputes (II), which will take effect 1 April 2016.
According to the press conference, in drafting the interpretation the SPC was mainly concerned with:
  • Reducing the high burden of proof and the time it takes to prosecute claims.
  • Enhancing certainty in the scope of patent protection.
  • Balancing the interests of patent rights holders and the public.
  • Avoiding abuse of market dominance.
The main issues addressed in the interpretation include:
  • Denying a defence against an infringement claim where a "recommended" national, industrial or local standard clearly indicates an SEP, unless the patent holder proposes to license the SEP in violation of FRAND (that is, fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory) terms.
  • Permitting a defence to an infringement claim where products and components that violate patent rights are legitimately sourced.
  • Permitting a court to determine a royalty for the use of an SEP where the parties are unable to reach agreement, provided the court considers the level of innovation of the patent, the role of the patent in the standard, the relevant technical field to which the standard belongs, and the nature and scope of application of the standard.
  • Enhancing the remedies for patent infringement, including the cessation of infringing activities and the calculation of compensation for damages.
  • Adjusting the impact on an infringement action of an administrative decision to invalidate patent rights.

Market reaction

Isabella Liu, partner, Baker & McKenzie, Hong Kong

"The spirit of various important provisions, for example on claim construction, has been adopted, partially or fully, by different local courts in judicial practice. Clarifications on such issues are welcomed, along with details on the handling of parallel patent invalidation proceedings and civil patent infringement actions. The fact that courts can now reject a patent infringement claim once a patent has been invalided by the Patent Review Board (without taking note of further appeals) underscores the importance of assessing invalidation risks before initiating patent enforcement actions in China. Also worth noting are provisions relating to the issuance of permanent injunction vs. royalty payments and the court's possible intervention on patent licensing terms for standard essential patents. Last but not least, administrative enforcement of patents has been a key focus in recent proposed legislative changes in China. However, in view of the perceived prevalence of junk patents (i.e., design and utility model patents granted without substantive examination), it remains to be seen whether increased administrative enforcement will benefit patentees seeking genuine enforcement or be taken advantage of by patent trolls or other ill-willed third parties."

Action items

GC for entities with significant patent portfolios should continue to pay close attention to this area. Given the courts' new power under the interpretation to impose licensing terms in relation to SEPs, counsel should carefully review relevant patent licensing arrangements to ensure the consistent use of FRAND terms. Close scrutiny is particularly important where the exercise of patent rights could be construed as impeding competition. In cases where patent infringement is ongoing, it also may be advisable to evaluate the risks of patent invalidation, and where those risks are deemed to be acceptable to consider the relatives pros and cons of pursuing administrative or judicial remedies under the new two-track system.

Three ministries issue notices raising e-commerce retail import tax

On 24 March 2016, the Ministry of Finance(MOF), General Administration of Customs(GAC) and State Administration of Tax jointly issued the Notice on Cross Border E-commerce Retail Import Tax Policy, which took effect 8 April 2016.
The notice will increase the tax applicable to retail goods imported pursuant to a transaction between a consumer in China and an overseas retailer that is consummated through an e-commerce platform. The notice re-characterises these retail imports from personal postal items, which are taxed at lower Postal Composite Rates, to items imported for general trade, which are subject to standard import duty, import value added tax (VAT) and (where applicable) consumption tax. The notice also establishes per transaction (RMB 2,000) and annual transaction (RMB 20,000) thresholds for determining the rates that apply to general trade retail imports. It further provides that the e-commerce company (that is, one that is the merchant of record), the e-commerce platform company (that is, one that acts as a marketplace) or the logistics company may be withholding agents for these taxes.
The Customs Tariff Commission of the State Council separately issued the Notice on Issues related to the Adjustment of Import Tax for Imported Articles, which also took effect 8 April 2016 and raised the Postal Composite Rates. Where a transaction exceeds one or both of the transaction thresholds, the customs duty and VAT can be significantly higher, and the effective tax can be even higher where the transaction is subject to consumption tax (for example, on purchases of luxury goods and cosmetics).

Market reaction

Jon Eicheberger, tax partner, Baker & McKenzie, Beijing

"While this development has been viewed in part as a crackdown on the grey market for imported consumer goods from websites outside of China, it is also a first step in what we expect will be a broader effort in the coming years to tax cross-border B2C e-commerce, encompassing not only physical goods but also the online supply of digital goods and services, and including income tax as well as turnover taxes such as VAT."

Action items

GC for companies that may be regarded as withholding agents for taxes in relation to cross border retail e-commerce transactions, that is, the merchant of record, the marketplace or the logistics company, should closely study the applicable rates for import duty, import VAT and consumption tax (as well as the new Postal Composite rates) and suggest appropriate revisions to internal policy. GC for these companies, as well as foodstuff manufactures and other companies, also may wish to review the "positive list" of cross border retail e-commerce commodities released in conjunction with the other two notices, as commodities not on this list are now prohibited from import to China through an e-commerce platform.

MOFCOM circulates two new draft standards on e-commerce

On 22 March 2016, the Ministry of Commerce (MOFCOM) circulated for public comment two draft industry standards applicable to online sellers and e-commerce platforms:
  • Business Services Specifications for Mobile Commodity E-commerce, which stipulate operating standards that would apply to online sellers and e-commerce platforms in relation to mobile commodity transactions.
  • Business Services Specifications for Cross Border Commodity E-commerce, which spell out operating standards that would govern online sellers and e-commerce platforms in relation to cross border commodity transactions.
Both drafts, which are designated to be non-binding standards, would establish standards applicable to the administration of online sellers, including for example:
  • Product pricing and payment.
  • Product measurements, origins or geographical indicators, inspection and testing and logistics.
  • Contracts, change orders, variation, breach and termination.
  • Insurance.
  • Claims.
  • Dispute resolution.
Both draft standards also pay particular attention to data privacy issues and require e-commerce platforms to:
  • Require authorization by the data subject as a condition to gathering and processing his or her personal information.
  • Desensitise data, that is, modify personal data so that it no longer contains sensitive private information, before the data is used for commercial purposes.
  • Ensure the security of data assets, that is, data of value to the organisation, whenever the platform is accessed by online sellers, logistics or payment services providers, and purchasers through a mobile device.
  • Encrypt personal data before it is transmitted online.
  • Record transmissions of personal data to administrative or judicial authorities.
Comments on each draft standard may be submitted until 31 May 2016.
The draft standards are related to draft standards on online retailing and online services circulated by MOFCOM in September 2015. For further information on these, see:
For more information on e-commerce in China generally, see Article, E-commerce in China.

Market reaction

Paul McKenzie, Managing Partner, Morrison & Foerster, Beijing and Shanghai

"Mobile e-commerce as well as cross-border e-commerce platforms like Tmall Global are among the fastest growing parts of China's e-commerce sector. These draft standards represent a significant effort by MOFCOM to define best practices. Not only should they be of interest to online sellers and marketplace operators in China, the draft standards governing cross-border ecommerce are of interest to international brands selling into China via e-commerce platforms such as Tmall Global."

Action items

Though these standards are not yet in effect, GC of online sellers and e-commerce marketplaces in China should carefully study the draft standards, as well as the draft standards on online retailing and online services circulated by MOFCOM in September 2015, and consider adjustments to related terms and conditions and operating practices in order to conform to the standards. It also could demonstrate goodwill to a company’s local commerce bureau for counsel and government relations colleagues to enquire into the status of the drafts on a named basis.