江西某县城管局变相设置准入,向9家企业违规收取41.4万元
Xin Lang Cai Jing·2026-01-29 04:20

Group 1 - The Ministry of Justice released the fourth batch of typical cases regarding administrative law enforcement related to enterprises, highlighting effective practices in correcting irregularities, promoting responsibilities, and coordinating efforts to support the construction of a unified market [1][2] - The cases demonstrate the importance of administrative law enforcement supervision in regulating behavior, maintaining market order, and stimulating enterprise vitality [1][2] Group 2 - Case 1: A county in Guangxi extended the seizure period of property in violation of the law, leading to corrective actions and educational training for enforcement personnel [1][2] - Case 2: An emergency management bureau in Zhejiang was found to have improperly charged fees for safety training, resulting in a requirement to stop charging and refund the fees [3][4] - Case 3: A county in Hainan was criticized for inaction regarding street vendors occupying a contracted area, prompting a clarification of responsibilities and corrective measures [5][6] Group 3 - Case 4: A city in Hunan faced scrutiny for exceeding its authority in issuing a business suspension order, leading to a retraction of the order and improved coordination with higher authorities [7][8] - Case 5: A city in Shandong coordinated multiple departments to address inconsistent enforcement regarding the use of maps in advertisements, resulting in a reduction of financial burdens on businesses [10][11] - Case 6: In Chongqing, a joint enforcement effort was initiated to address illegal sales of hazardous chemicals, leading to criminal charges against offenders [13][14] Group 4 - Case 7: A county in Jiangxi was found to have set barriers to market entry for bike-sharing companies, resulting in the removal of these barriers and the return of improperly collected fees [16][17] - Case 8: A city in Fujian identified errors in legal application by a market regulation bureau, leading to a correction process and a comprehensive review of similar cases [20][21]

江西某县城管局变相设置准入,向9家企业违规收取41.4万元 - Reportify