多次封禁后又复出的头部主播“太原老葛”，涉虚假宣传、价格欺诈入选市监总局公布十大案例

Core Viewpoint - The prominent live-streaming host "Taiyuan Lao Ge" has faced multiple penalties from various authorities over the past decade for issues related to false advertising and price fraud, culminating in significant legal actions against his associated company, Shanxi Lao Ge Trading Co., Ltd. [1][10] Group 1: Background and History - "Taiyuan Lao Ge," whose real name is Ge Liang, gained fame through collaborations with other internet celebrities and has been involved in various controversies since 2013 [2]. - The host's popularity peaked with over 9.9 million followers on a live-streaming platform, but he has been penalized multiple times for illegal activities, including hosting unapproved large events and creating false narratives during live broadcasts [2][6]. Group 2: Legal Issues and Penalties - In January 2026, Shanxi Lao Ge Trading Co., Ltd. was implicated in a major case of false advertising and price fraud, which was highlighted by the State Administration for Market Regulation as one of the top ten significant cases of 2025 [1][10]. - The company faced administrative penalties totaling 5.6 million yuan for misleading promotional practices and was also fined 1.2051 million yuan for tax-related violations, including failure to withhold personal income tax [9][10]. Group 3: Allegations of Fraud - A businesswoman, Wang Cui, reported that she incurred losses exceeding 10 million yuan due to fraudulent practices associated with "Taiyuan Lao Ge," including inflated sales figures and excessive returns from customers [3][4]. - Evidence presented indicated that out of 28.11 million yuan in sales during four live-streaming sessions, 19.11 million yuan were attributed to fake orders, leading to significant financial losses for the involved merchants [3][4]. Group 4: Industry Impact - The controversies surrounding "Taiyuan Lao Ge" reflect broader issues within the live-streaming e-commerce industry, including rampant false advertising and unethical marketing practices that have prompted regulatory scrutiny [8][10]. - The case has drawn attention to the need for stricter regulations in the live-streaming sector to combat unfair competition and protect consumer rights [10].