China Justice Observer

中司观察

EnglishArabicChinese (Simplified)DutchFrenchGermanHindiItalianJapaneseKoreanPortugueseRussianSpanishSwedishHebrewIndonesianVietnameseThaiTurkishMalay

SPC Amends Judicial Interpretation on Illegal Fundraising Crimes

Wed, 23 Mar 2022
Categories: China Legal Trends

On 24 Feb. 2022, China’s Supreme People’s Court (SPC) issued the “Decision to Amend the Interpretation of China’s Supreme People’s Court on Several Issues Concerning Specific Application of Law in the Trial of Illegal Fund-raising Criminal Cases” (hereinafter “the Decision”, 关于修改<最高人民法院关于审理非法集资刑事案件具体应用法律若干问题的解释>的决定), which improves the standard of conviction and punishment of illegal absorption of public deposits and fund-raising frauds stipulated in the original judicial interpretation established in 2010.

It’s noteworthy that the Decision includes raising public money through virtual currency as illegal fund-raising.

It suggests that certain virtual currency-related transactions are criminalized and also, virtual currencies would be subject to stricter supervision in China.

The newly-amended interpretation is promulgated to tie in with the significant changes regarding illegal absorption of public deposits and fund-raising frauds made by the“Amendment (XI) to the Criminal Law of the People’s Republic of China” which came into effect on 1 March 2021.

After the original judicial interpretation was promulgated in 2010, for more than ten years, the means of illegal fundraising has developed from offline to online, and the target of absorbing funds has expanded from young and middle-aged groups with strong investment intention to elderly people with abundant savings and risk aversion.

Therefore, the SPC explicitly clarifies through this judicial interpretation that any person who conducts fundraising regarding online loans, virtual currency trading, and senior care services may commit a crime.

 

 

Cover Photo by Cexin Ding on Unsplash

Contributors: CJO Staff Contributors Team

Save as PDF

Related laws on China Laws Portal

You might also like

Guangdong High Court Highlights Landmark Mainland-Hong Kong Bankruptcy Ruling

Among 10 typical cases released by the Guangdong High People's Court to advance legal alignment in the Greater Bay Area, a landmark ruling (Re Guangdong Overseas Construction Corporation) stands out for securing Hong Kong judicial recognition for a bankruptcy administrator appointed by a mainland court outside designated pilot regions.

China Publishes First Typical Cases in Sports Arbitration

China Commission of Arbitration for Sports (CCAS) has released its first set of six typical cases, establishing a precedent, among others, that sports agency contract disputes fall under specialized sports arbitration rather than general commercial arbitration.

China Designates Beijing Court for ICSID Arbitral Awards

China has officially designated the Beijing No. 4 Intermediate People's Court to handle the recognition and enforcement of ICSID awards, filling a long-standing procedural gap and advancing its restrictive immunity framework.

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)