China Justice Observer

中司观察

EnglishArabicChinese (Simplified)DutchFrenchGermanHindiItalianJapaneseKoreanPortugueseRussianSpanishSwedishHebrewIndonesianVietnameseThaiTurkishMalay

SAMR Publishes 2020 Report on Anti-monopoly Law Enforcement

Thu, 07 Oct 2021
Categories: China Legal Trends

On 3 Sept. 2021, the State Administration for Market Regulation (SAMR) published the “Annual Report on Anti-monopoly Law Enforcement in China (2020)” (hereinafter “the Report”, 中国反垄断执法年度报告(2020)), summarizing its law enforcement work to improve the fair competition system and optimize the competitive market in 2020.

According to the Report, the market regulatory authority has made efforts to improve the legal system of anti-monopoly, such as completing the revision draft of the Anti-monopoly Law and promulgating the “Interim Provisions on the Examination of Concentration of Undertakings” (经营者集中审查暂行规定) and the “Anti-monopoly Compliance Guidelines for Business Operators” (经营者反垄断合规指南), etc. The market regulatory authority has also guided the Hainan Free Trade Zone to formulate the “Fair Competition Regulations” (公平竞争条例) to accumulate replicable experiences for the implementation of competition policies.

In 2020, the SAMR accelerated the development of the fair competition system, issued the “Notice on Further Promoting the Fair Competition Review” (关于进一步推进公平竞争审查工作的通知) and revised the “Implementing Rules for the Fair Competition Review System” (公平竞争审查制度实施细则), aiming to improve the review mechanism and optimize the review process. Moreover, the SAMR improved the market competition assessment system, developed working rules for market competition assessment and examples of industry competition assessment, improved the overall market competition assessment report, and carried out competition assessment of eight industries such as automobile and platform economy.

 

 

Cover Photo by Yuan (https://unsplash.com/@zili) on Unsplash

Contributors: CJO Staff Contributors Team

Save as PDF

Related laws on China Laws Portal

You might also like

PRC Double Interest neither Double nor Penal, Australian Courts Clear Its Name When Enforcing Chinese Judgments

Recent Australian case law clarifies that the “double interest” mechanism in the People’s Republic of China (PRC) monetary judgments functions as a compensatory post-judgment interest framework rather than an unenforceable penalty. This consolidates Australia’s position as a highly attractive and creditor-friendly forum for enforcing Chinese judgments. See Zhengzhou Lvdu Real Estate Group Co v Shu [2024] NSWSC 58 (6 February 2024), Fu v Pang [2025] VSC 597 (16 September 2025)

IOMed Settles First Case, Resolving China-Singapore Maritime Dispute

The newly established International Organization for Mediation (IOMed) has successfully resolved its inaugural case—a maritime charter dispute between Chinese and Singaporean parties—marking a major milestone for the world’s first government-backed global mediation body.