Core Viewpoint - The regulatory environment for delisted companies in China's capital market is becoming increasingly stringent, emphasizing that delisting does not exempt companies from accountability for past violations [1][4][5]. Group 1: Regulatory Actions and Penalties - Two delisted companies, Zhejiang Aikang New Energy Technology Co., Ltd. and Hainan Puli Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., received significant fines totaling 34.3 million yuan and 500,000 yuan respectively for information disclosure violations [1]. - As of November 2023, a total of 91 delisted companies have been investigated, with 73 facing penalties amounting to 2 billion yuan [2]. - The China Securities Regulatory Commission (CSRC) has initiated a delisting process for companies involved in severe financial fraud, with 14 companies facing potential mandatory delisting this year, marking a historical high [3]. Group 2: Enforcement of Accountability - The principle of "delisting does not exempt" has led to 38 delisted companies facing administrative penalties this year, surpassing the total for the previous year [4]. - Companies like Jiangsu Sunshine Co., Ltd. and Hengli Industrial Development Group Co., Ltd. have received multiple administrative penalties for various violations post-delisting [4]. - The CSRC is also investigating the accounting firms involved in financial fraud cases, indicating a comprehensive approach to accountability [5]. Group 3: Investor Protection Mechanisms - The regulatory framework has been enhanced to protect investors, with 12 delisted companies disclosing civil litigation progress against them this year [6]. - Recent court rulings have favored investors in several cases, reinforcing the legal recourse available to them [6]. - The CSRC has issued new guidelines aimed at strengthening investor protection during the delisting process, focusing on continuous monitoring and transparency [8]. Group 4: Systematic Approach to Deterrence - The combination of administrative, civil, and criminal accountability creates a robust deterrent against corporate misconduct, aiming to ensure that the costs of violations outweigh any potential benefits [7]. - Experts emphasize the need for a comprehensive understanding of the legal relationships among different parties involved in delisted companies to facilitate effective accountability [7].

据统计，去年以来，截至今年11月底，累计91家次退市公司被查处，73家被重罚20亿元。 同时，监管部门推动对退市公司立体化追责。《证券日报》记者据全国股转公司网站不完全统计，今年前11个月，有12家 退市公司公告了投资者民事诉讼进展，6家退市公司公告了公司相关责任人被追究刑事责任的公告。 本报记者 吴晓璐 "退市不免责"再添新案例。11月28日晚间，2家退市公司收到罚单。浙江证监局公布对退市公司浙江爱康新能源科技股份 有限公司及5名责任人的行政处罚决定，合计罚款3430万元；退市公司海南普利制药股份有限公司发布公告称，公司及相关当 事人收到海南证监局送达的《行政处罚事先告知书》，因信息披露违法违规，公司被处罚50万元，时任董事长被处罚20万元。 今年以来，资本市场退市监管高压态势不减，强化退市全流程监管。一方面，监管部门推动"应退尽退"，多元化退市渠道 畅通，因财务造假触及重大违法强制退市标准的数量创新高；另一方面，对退市公司处罚不手软，罚单数量创新高，杜绝"一 退了之"。 造假退市不含糊 多元指标加速"劣汰" 11月28日，证监会披露了立方数科股份有限公司（简称"立方数科"）严重财务造假案件。立方数科因20 ...

因爱康科技2019—2023年信披存在重大遗漏、虚假记载，2024年部分信披存在虚假记载、未及时披露情 形，浙江证监局决定对公司责令改正，给予警告，并处以1200万元的罚款；对包括时任董事长、实际控 制人邹承慧在内的5名责任人给予警告，并共处以2230万元的罚款。 实际上，年内已有多家已退市公司收到证监部门《行政处罚决定书》或《行政处罚事先告知书》。此 外，也不乏退市后被移送公安机关追究刑事责任、被起诉索赔的案例。 中经记者 孙汝祥 夏欣 北京报道 业内专家对《中国经营报》记者表示，对存在违法行为的退市公司及相关责任方，进行全链条立体化追 责，使得"退市不免责"的原则不断得以彰显。 "退市不免责"又增一案例。11月28日，浙江证监局集中公布对已退市公司爱康科技及5名责任人的行政 处罚决定。 爱康科技退市后遭罚 浙江证监局11月28日公布的《行政处罚决定书》显示，爱康科技2019—2023年信息披露存在重大遗漏、 虚假记载；2024年部分信息披露存在虚假记载、未及时披露情形。 其中，爱康科技未按规定披露非经营性资金占用情况，未按规定披露关联担保，2021—2023年年报存在 重大遗漏；通过少计借款费用方式虚增利 ...

Core Viewpoint - Hengli Industrial has been penalized for inflating its operating income by a total of 595 million yuan from 2020 to the first half of 2023, leading to false financial statements. The Hunan Securities Regulatory Bureau plans to impose fines totaling 39.4 million yuan on the company and 19 responsible individuals, highlighting the principle of "delisting does not exempt from liability" in securities regulation [1][2][3]. Summary by Sections Financial Misconduct - From 2020 to the first half of 2023, Hengli Industrial inflated its operating income by 227 million yuan, 181 million yuan, 136 million yuan, and 51 million yuan, representing 74.24%, 52.27%, 55.08%, and 47.77% of the reported operating income for those periods respectively [2] - The company also inflated its operating costs by 220 million yuan, 175 million yuan, 132 million yuan, and 49 million yuan, accounting for 77.53%, 53.9%, 55.45%, and 50.43% of the reported operating costs respectively [2] - The financial fraud was facilitated by third-party cooperation, where Hengli Industrial used its wholly-owned subsidiary to coordinate with suppliers and customers to create fictitious transactions [2][3]. Regulatory Actions - The Hunan Securities Regulatory Bureau intends to impose an 8 million yuan fine on Hengli Industrial and a total of 31.4 million yuan in fines on 19 responsible individuals, including the former chairman [3] - This is not the first penalty for Hengli Industrial post-delisting; previously, on September 19, the company and seven individuals were fined 11.5 million yuan for information disclosure violations [3]. Audit and Legal Issues - Hengli Industrial changed its auditing firm to Shenzhen Xutai Accounting Firm, which reported an adjusted revenue of 196 million yuan, leading to a significant disagreement between the two parties [4][5] - The company filed a lawsuit against the previous auditing firm, claiming damages of 38.27 million yuan due to alleged negligence and failure to provide timely audit evidence [6][7].

Core Viewpoint - The article highlights the ongoing stringent regulatory environment in the A-share market, with multiple companies facing investigations and penalties for violations related to information disclosure and financial misconduct [2][10]. Group 1: Companies Under Investigation - Eight companies disclosed that they or their controlling shareholders and executives are under investigation by the China Securities Regulatory Commission (CSRC) for violations such as information disclosure and insider trading [2][3]. - Specific companies involved include Bayi Steel, Delisted Haiyue, Intercontinental Oil & Gas, Shanghai Washba, and *ST Changyao, with allegations ranging from information disclosure violations to false financial reporting [3][4]. Group 2: Administrative Penalties - Three companies, including Delisted Longyu, ST Tiantian, and *ST Jintai, received administrative penalties, with Delisted Longyu facing fines exceeding 30 million yuan for years of financial fraud [6][8]. - Delisted Longyu was found to have inflated revenue by approximately 14.54 billion yuan and profits by 37.32 million yuan through fictitious trading activities from 2019 to 2022 [6][7]. Group 3: Impact on Companies - Companies such as Intercontinental Oil & Gas and Shanghai Washba stated that the investigations would not adversely affect their operations, as the inquiries pertain to individual shareholders rather than the companies themselves [5]. - However, *ST Changyao warned that if the CSRC's findings lead to administrative penalties, it could trigger mandatory delisting due to serious violations [5]. Group 4: Broader Regulatory Trends - The article notes a trend of increasing accountability for companies that have been delisted, emphasizing that delisting does not exempt them from regulatory scrutiny [10]. - Recent cases show that even companies that have been delisted for over a year continue to face investigations and penalties for past violations [10][11].

Core Viewpoint - The article highlights the ongoing strict regulatory environment in the A-share market, with multiple companies facing investigations and penalties for violations related to information disclosure and financial misconduct [3][11]. Group 1: Regulatory Actions - Eight listed companies disclosed investigations or penalties from the China Securities Regulatory Commission (CSRC) for violations such as information disclosure and insider trading [3][5]. - Companies involved include Bayi Steel, Delisted Haiyue, and ST Changyao, with specific allegations ranging from financial data falsification to insider trading [5][6]. - The regulatory stance emphasizes that delisting does not exempt companies from accountability, marking a shift in enforcement where violations will be pursued relentlessly [3][11]. Group 2: Specific Cases of Investigation - Bayi Steel and ST Changyao are under investigation for information disclosure violations and false financial reporting, respectively [5][6]. - Delisted Haiyue's controlling shareholder is being investigated for information disclosure violations, while Intercontinental Oil and Shanghai Xiba are facing scrutiny for short-term trading and shareholder trading violations [5][6]. - Companies like Intercontinental Oil claim that the investigations do not impact their operations, asserting normal business continuity [6]. Group 3: Administrative Penalties - Three companies, including Delisted Longyu, ST Tian Sheng, and ST Jintai, received administrative penalties, with Delisted Longyu facing significant fines for years of financial fraud [7][8]. - Delisted Longyu was found to have inflated revenue by approximately 14.54 billion yuan and profits by 37.32 million yuan through fictitious trading activities from 2019 to 2022 [9]. - ST Jintai and ST Tian Sheng also faced penalties for failing to disclose annual reports on time and for profit inflation in previous financial statements [10][12]. Group 4: Broader Implications - The article notes that even companies that have been delisted are not escaping penalties, with several facing investigations for past violations [11][12]. - Recent statistics indicate that multiple companies have been penalized for failing to disclose annual reports or for falsifying financial data, reflecting a broader trend of increased regulatory scrutiny in the market [14][15].

Core Viewpoint - The A-share market is experiencing intensified regulatory scrutiny, with eight listed companies disclosing investigations or penalties related to violations such as information disclosure and short-term trading [1][2]. Group 1: Companies Under Investigation - Five companies, including Bayi Steel and ST Changyao, have been disclosed as subjects of investigation, with allegations ranging from information disclosure violations to false financial reporting [2]. - The controlling shareholders or executives of companies like退市海越 and洲际油气 are also under investigation for various violations, including illegal trading practices [2]. Group 2: Administrative Penalties - Three companies,退市龙宇, ST天圣, and *ST金泰, have received administrative penalties, with退市龙宇 facing fines exceeding 30 million yuan for multiple years of financial fraud [5][6]. - The regulatory investigation revealed that退市龙宇 inflated revenue by approximately 14.54 billion yuan and profits by 37.32 million yuan from 2019 to 2022 through fictitious trading [6]. Group 3: Impact on Companies - Companies like洲际油气 and上海洗霸 claim that the investigations will not adversely affect their operations, as the investigations pertain to individual shareholders rather than the companies themselves [3][4]. - However, *ST长药 has warned of potential delisting risks if found guilty of financial misconduct, which could trigger mandatory delisting procedures [4]. Group 4: Broader Regulatory Trends - The regulatory environment has shifted towards holding companies accountable even after delisting, with a clear message that delisting does not exempt them from penalties for past violations [1][8]. - Recent trends indicate that multiple companies, including those that have already been delisted, are facing investigations and penalties for various compliance failures [9][10].

Core Viewpoint - The recent administrative penalties imposed on delisted companies such as Fan Hai Holdings and Qingdao Zhongcheng highlight the ongoing trend of strict regulatory oversight in China's capital markets, emphasizing that "delisting does not exempt from liability" [1][3][11] Regulatory Actions - In October, seven delisted companies faced regulatory actions, including administrative penalties and investigations, indicating a comprehensive approach to enforcement throughout the IPO, operation, and delisting phases [1][3] - Qingdao Zhongcheng was penalized for long-term systematic financial fraud and failure to disclose significant litigation in a timely manner, resulting in fines totaling 20.6 million yuan [4][5] - Fan Hai Holdings received penalties for failing to disclose breaches of financing contracts, with unpaid debts amounting to 5.943 billion yuan in 2022 and 2.6 billion yuan in 2023, leading to fines of 8.4 million yuan [6][8] Investor Protection Mechanisms - The China Securities Regulatory Commission (CSRC) has strengthened investor protection measures, particularly in cases of major violations leading to forced delisting [8][10] - New guidelines encourage controlling shareholders to proactively compensate investors for losses incurred due to corporate misconduct, enhancing the legal framework for investor rights [9][10] - Various compensation mechanisms, including civil damages for false statements and representative lawsuits, are being utilized to protect investors during the delisting process [9][10]

Core Viewpoint - The article highlights the increasing regulatory scrutiny and penalties imposed on delisted companies in China's capital market, emphasizing that "delisting does not exempt from liability" has become a norm in market regulation [1][2][7]. Group 1: Regulatory Actions - Seven delisted companies have faced regulatory actions in October, including Pan Hai Holdings and Qingdao Zhongcheng, indicating a trend of strict enforcement against financial misconduct [1][2]. - Qingdao Zhongcheng was penalized for systematic financial fraud and failure to disclose significant lawsuits, with fines totaling 20.6 million yuan, including 7.5 million yuan for the company itself [2][4]. - Pan Hai Holdings received a penalty for failing to disclose breaches of financing contracts, with fines totaling 8.4 million yuan, including 4 million yuan for the company [4]. Group 2: Investor Protection Mechanisms - The China Securities Regulatory Commission (CSRC) has strengthened investor protection measures, particularly in cases of major violations leading to forced delisting [5][6]. - New guidelines encourage controlling shareholders to proactively compensate investors for losses incurred due to illegal activities, enhancing the legal framework for investor protection [6][7]. - Various compensation mechanisms, including civil damages for false statements and representative lawsuits, are being utilized to protect investors' rights in the context of delisting [6][7].

Core Viewpoint - The recent administrative penalties imposed on delisted companies such as Fan Hai Holdings and Qingdao Zhongcheng highlight the ongoing trend of strict regulatory oversight in China's capital markets, emphasizing that "delisting does not equate to exemption from accountability" [1][4]. Regulatory Actions - In October, seven delisted companies faced regulatory actions, including administrative penalties and investigations, indicating a comprehensive approach to enforcement across the IPO, operation, and delisting phases [1][4]. - Qingdao Zhongcheng was penalized for long-term systematic financial fraud and failure to disclose significant litigation in a timely manner, resulting in a total fine of 20.6 million yuan [5][7]. - Fan Hai Holdings received penalties for failing to disclose defaults on financing contracts, with overdue debts amounting to 5.943 billion yuan in 2022 and 2.6 billion yuan in 2023, leading to a total fine of 8.4 million yuan [7][8]. Investor Protection Mechanisms - The China Securities Regulatory Commission (CSRC) has strengthened investor protection measures, particularly in cases of major violations leading to forced delisting, encouraging proactive compensation from controlling shareholders [8][9]. - The introduction of various compensation mechanisms, including special representative litigation and advance compensation, aims to address investor losses effectively [8][9]. - The ongoing legal reforms and regulatory updates are designed to enhance the legal framework for investor protection, ensuring that accountability for delisted companies is firmly established [9].