证监会四天点名3家退市公司，信号很大

Core Viewpoint - The recent actions against three delisted companies signal a new regulatory trend in China, emphasizing that delisting does not equate to immunity from accountability for past violations [1][3][6]. Group 1: Recent Regulatory Actions - Three delisted companies, China Zhongqi, Jiangsu Sunshine, and Futong Information, were recently named by regulatory authorities for ongoing issues despite their delisted status [1][3]. - Jiangsu Sunshine received an administrative penalty notice for non-operational fund occupation and information disclosure violations, resulting in a total fine of 3.3 million yuan [1][4]. - China Zhongqi and Futong Information are under investigation for suspected information disclosure violations, with investigations still ongoing [1][4]. Group 2: Background and Context - The number of companies forcibly delisted from 2021 to September 2025 has reached 178, more than double the total number of delisted companies before the reform [1][8]. - The regulatory framework is evolving to ensure that delisted companies remain accountable for their past actions, with a focus on a "three-punishment linkage" system combining administrative, civil, and criminal penalties [1][9]. Group 3: Specific Violations - Jiangsu Sunshine's violations included the occupation of funds related to land transfer payments and overdue receivables from its controlling shareholder's subsidiary, totaling 2.61 billion yuan [4][5]. - Futong Information faced issues such as delayed disclosures of significant lawsuits and financial discrepancies, with a 98% variance between its profit forecast and audited results [5][9]. Group 4: Broader Implications - The ongoing regulatory actions against delisted companies reflect a commitment to enhancing market integrity and accountability, with a notable increase in investigations and penalties since the implementation of stricter delisting policies [8][9]. - The establishment of a comprehensive accountability system aims to deter future violations and protect investors, with ongoing cases indicating that the regulatory scrutiny will continue [9].