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，针对存在违法行为的退市公司及相关责任方的全链条立体化追责 体系，成效逐步显现，"退市不免责"的原则持续得以彰显。而行刑衔接也能更深入地打击违法犯罪行 为，强化震慑力。 1个月内处罚4家已退市公司 10月31日，青岛中程公告，收到中国证监会《行政处罚决定书》。因青岛中程2017—2022年年报存在虚 假记载，未按规定披露重大诉讼事项，证监会决定对青岛中程责令改正，给予警告，并处以750万元罚 款；对8名相关责任人给予警告，并共处1310万元罚款。其中，时任董事、总裁、副总裁JIA XIAOYU 被处以650万元罚款，并被采取10年证券市场禁入措施。 经查，青岛中程2017—2019年分别虚增利润总额55276.88万元、21775.90万元、28537.80万元，2020年 虚减利润总额28179.72万元，2021年虚增利润总额500.23万元，2022年虚增无形资产30970.36万元。 2025年7月21日，青岛中程被摘牌退市。 2024年2月7日被摘牌退市的泛海控股，亦于2025年10月31日披露了北京证监局下发的《行政处罚决定 书》。 ...

【#多家退市企业被持续追责#，#退市不免责成监管常态#】过去一周，有3家退市公司及其相关方收到 监管举措，或被立案或接罚单，均是在上市期间涉嫌存在违法违规问题被监管部门持续追责。可见，即 便脱掉了"上市"外衣，在从严监管的市场生态下，涉事主体依旧要承担相应责任，不会因退市而免责。 今年以来，已有多家公司在退市后被追责，涉及亿利洁能、退市龙宇、泰禾集团、东旭光电等，其中， 亿利洁能、东旭光电均被罚款上亿元。若把时间拉长看，截至目前，证监会已对70余家退市公司违法违 规行为进行查处，并移送33家退市公司涉嫌信息披露犯罪线索。清华大学国家金融研究院院长、清华大 学五道口金融学院副院长田轩表示，针对"带病"退市公司及相关责任方的全链条立体化追责体系，意在 提升市场各方的合规意识，增强投资者信心，为资本市场高质量发展提供坚实保障。可以看到，在行政 处罚方面，监管机构对退市公司及责任人的追责力度显著加大，对违法违规问题一追到底，逐步实现了 行政监管全过程覆盖；同时，刑事追责、民事赔偿也在同步跟进，立体化追责大幅提高违法成本。（证 券时报） ...

Core Viewpoint - The concept of "delisting does not exempt from liability" has become a regulatory norm in the capital market, indicating that companies and related parties will continue to be held accountable for violations even after delisting [1][4]. Group 1: Regulatory Actions - Three delisted companies and their related parties have recently faced regulatory actions, including investigations and penalties, highlighting ongoing accountability in the market [1][2]. - China Zhongqi Investment Co., Ltd. announced that its controlling shareholder, Zhongqi Group, received a notice of investigation from the CSRC for suspected information disclosure violations [2]. - Jiangsu Sunshine, a delisted company, received a notice of administrative penalty for failing to disclose significant events related to a related party transaction, with proposed fines totaling 3.3 million yuan [3]. Group 2: Trends in Delisting Accountability - There has been a notable increase in regulatory actions against delisted companies, with over 70 companies investigated for violations and 33 cases referred for suspected criminal information disclosure [4]. - The regulatory framework aims to enhance compliance awareness among market participants and boost investor confidence, contributing to the high-quality development of the capital market [4]. Group 3: Legal Mechanisms and Enforcement - The introduction of representative litigation mechanisms for delisted companies marks a significant advancement in civil compensation, reducing the cost of investor rights protection and increasing litigation efficiency [6]. - The CSRC has intensified its crackdown on financial fraud, with 13 companies facing mandatory delisting this year due to severe violations, particularly financial misconduct [7]. - Regulatory authorities are focusing on key individuals such as actual controllers and major shareholders to ensure accountability and prevent failures in oversight by intermediaries [7].

"退市不免责"已经成为资本市场的监管常态。 过去一周，有3家退市公司及其相关方收到监管举措，或被立案或接罚单，均是在上市期间涉嫌存在违法违规问题被监管部门持续追责。可见，即便脱掉 了"上市"外衣，在从严监管的市场生态下，涉事主体依旧要承担相应责任，不会因退市而免责。 南开大学金融学教授田利辉表示，当前，从严监管已经贯穿到企业上市、经营、退市的全周期，全过程监管、全链条追责对于打击违法违规行为形成了有效 的震慑，也打破了部分市场主体"退市即免责"的想法。随着监管体系的不断完善，投资者保护效力的显现，将全面提升资本市场违法成本，净化资本市场生 态，推动市场规范、稳健发展。 多家退市企业及相关方被追责 近日，退市一年有余的中国中期投资股份有限公司（以下简称"中国中期"）公告称，控股股东中期集团有限公司收到证监会的立案告知书，根据告知书，因涉 嫌信息披露违法违规，证监会决定对中期集团有限公司立案调查。截至今年6月底，中期集团持有中国中期6707.76万股，持股比例19.44%，为后者控股股 东。 而在去年，因中国中期2023年年报被出具无法表示意见的审计报告，触及深交所规定的股票终止上市情形，深交所决定终止中国中期上 ...

Group 1 - The principle of "delisting does not exempt from liability" is reaffirmed, indicating that delisting is a starting point for accountability rather than an end point [1][2][3] - Regulatory bodies have significantly increased the accountability measures against delisted companies and their executives, with notable fines imposed on companies like Huatie Co. and Taihe Group [2][3] - A comprehensive accountability system has been established, targeting not only the delisted companies but also related parties, including intermediaries involved in fraudulent activities [4][5] Group 2 - The administrative penalties are designed to provide immediate deterrence, while criminal accountability serves as a high-pressure deterrent, and civil compensation, particularly through representative lawsuits, offers investor relief [5][6] - The introduction of representative lawsuits for investors marks a significant breakthrough in investor protection mechanisms, allowing for collective claims against delisted companies and their affiliates [6][7] - Intermediaries are now also being held accountable, as seen in the case of Geer Software, where they are pursuing compensation from parties involved in fraudulent activities [7] Group 3 - Continuous improvement of the accountability system is necessary, with suggestions for enhancing investor protection and streamlining the processes for civil and criminal accountability [8][9] - The need for clearer standards regarding the accountability of third parties involved in fraud is emphasized, along with the importance of strengthening recovery efforts from responsible parties [9][10] - Recommendations include improving data sharing among regulatory bodies and enhancing the efficiency of case handling, as well as exploring diversified dispute resolution mechanisms to lower the costs for small investors [10][11]

Core Viewpoint - The principle of "delisting does not exempt from liability" is being reinforced, indicating a shift towards a comprehensive accountability system for delisted companies and related parties [1][2][4]. Regulatory Actions - In August, Huatie Co. and Taihe Group received fines of 24.15 million yuan and 17.4 million yuan respectively for violations, highlighting the increased enforcement against delisted companies [1][2]. - The regulatory bodies are pursuing a full-chain accountability system, enhancing compliance awareness and investor confidence, which is crucial for the high-quality development of the capital market [2][4]. Legal Framework - The establishment of a three-dimensional accountability system involving administrative penalties, civil liability, and criminal prosecution is being emphasized, with significant penalties being imposed on companies and their executives [2][5]. - The Supreme Court and the China Securities Regulatory Commission (CSRC) have issued guidelines to ensure strict enforcement against fraudulent activities, facilitating seamless connections between administrative and criminal responsibilities [5][6]. Investor Protection - The introduction of representative litigation mechanisms for investors marks a significant breakthrough in protecting investor rights, allowing for collective claims against delisted companies [6][10]. - The CSRC's actions against companies like Meishang Ecology, which was sent for criminal prosecution post-delisting, demonstrate the commitment to investor protection and accountability [5][6]. Accountability of Intermediaries - Intermediaries involved in fraudulent activities are also being held accountable, as seen in the case of Geler Software, which faced claims for 372 million yuan from three intermediary firms [7][10]. - The legal responsibilities of intermediaries are being clarified, expanding the scope of accountability within the financial ecosystem [7][10]. Continuous Improvement - There is an ongoing need to enhance the full-chain accountability system, particularly in protecting investor rights and improving the efficiency of legal processes [8][11]. - Suggestions include optimizing data sharing among regulatory bodies and establishing compensation funds to ensure timely restitution for investors [10][11].