Workflow
监管部门对财务造假全面“亮剑”
Zheng Quan Ri Bao·2025-09-17 16:19

Core Viewpoint - Regulatory authorities in China are adopting a "zero tolerance" approach towards financial fraud, significantly increasing penalties for companies involved in such activities, aiming to create a market environment where fraud is discouraged [1][2][4]. Group 1: Regulatory Actions - ST Emergency (300527) faces a total fine of 5.9 million yuan due to financial fraud in its 2022 annual report, marking the eighth penalty issued by regulators for financial fraud in September alone [1]. - Over 30 companies have received penalties for financial fraud this year, including both listed and delisted companies, indicating a strict stance against the notion of "retirement from the market" as an escape from accountability [2][3]. - The China Securities Regulatory Commission (CSRC) emphasizes that delisting does not exempt companies from penalties, reinforcing the message that all parties involved in financial misconduct will be held accountable [2][3]. Group 2: Penalty Amounts and Trends - The amount of penalties for financial fraud has significantly increased this year, with several companies facing fines exceeding 100 million yuan, enhancing the deterrent effect on the market [4][5]. - Notable cases include Dongxu Optoelectronic Technology Co., which faced fines totaling 4.2 billion yuan, and its parent company Dongxu Group, which was fined 12.42 billion yuan for financial fraud and fraudulent issuance [4][5]. Group 3: Comprehensive Accountability - Regulatory authorities are expanding the scope of accountability to include third parties involved in financial fraud, such as suppliers and intermediaries, to dismantle the "ecosystem" of fraud [6][7]. - The CSRC has initiated investigations into companies that collaborated in financial fraud, aiming to break the profit chain associated with such activities [6][7]. - There is a growing trend of civil and criminal accountability for individuals responsible for financial fraud, enhancing the overall deterrent effect of regulatory actions [7].