两天两家退市公司被罚 监管部门推动立体追责杜绝“一退了之”

Core Points - Two delisted companies, Guangdong Huatie Tongda High-speed Equipment Co., Ltd. and Taihe Group Co., Ltd., received administrative penalties from regulatory authorities, indicating a strict enforcement attitude from regulators [1][2][3] Group 1: Regulatory Actions - Guangdong Huatie was delisted in August 2024 after its stock price fell below 1 yuan for 20 consecutive trading days, and it has since received multiple penalties for serious violations, including financial fraud and undisclosed large fund occupations [3][4] - The Guangdong Securities Regulatory Bureau imposed a total fine of 26.2 million yuan on Huatie and banned its actual controller from the market for life [3][4] - In August 2025, Huatie received another penalty for new violations occurring before its delisting, including failing to disclose related party transactions worth approximately 1.1 billion yuan and inflating inventory by 600 million yuan [4][6] Group 2: Investor Protection - The regulatory framework emphasizes that delisting does not exempt companies from accountability, aiming to protect small investors from fraudulent practices [4][6] - The new "National Nine Articles" propose a compensation mechanism for investors affected by major violations leading to delisting, ensuring that responsible parties are held accountable [8][9] - Recent cases have shown successful compensation for investors, with significant amounts being returned through legal actions and administrative measures [8][9] Group 3: Criminal Accountability - The regulatory authorities have intensified criminal accountability measures, with 33 delisted companies referred to law enforcement for suspected information disclosure crimes since 2024 [9][10] - Criminal penalties serve as a deterrent against severe violations, complementing administrative and civil penalties to create a comprehensive accountability system [10][11] - High-profile cases have resulted in significant prison sentences and financial penalties for individuals involved in fraudulent activities, reinforcing the message of zero tolerance for misconduct [10][11]