Core Viewpoint - The implementation of the new Securities Law has led to an increase in litigation cases related to false statements in the bond market, shifting the judicial practice from generalized joint liability to a rational return to matching fault and responsibility [1][2]. Summary by Sections Institutional Evolution: Reconstruction of Intermediary Responsibility - The new Securities Law significantly modifies the conditions for public bond issuance, emphasizing the quality of information disclosure over government endorsement, which compels intermediaries to shift from formal compliance to substantive risk control [3]. Changes in Responsibility Subjects - The responsibility subject has expanded from "issuers and listed companies" to "information disclosure obligors," including direct responsibility personnel from sponsors and underwriters, highlighting the legislative focus on the quality of information disclosure [4]. Changes in Responsibility Allocation - The new Securities Law continues to prioritize institutional responsibility without listing personnel from securities service institutions as direct responsible parties, establishing a layered responsibility mechanism where institutions bear external responsibility while individuals may face internal accountability [5][6]. Changes in Adjudication Rules - The new Securities Law strengthens the presumption of fault for securities service institutions in cases of false statements, requiring differentiation between intentional and negligent acts to determine legal liability [7]. Challenges of Bond Market Specificity - Despite the establishment of a preliminary rules system for false statement liability, there remains a "stock-centered" path dependency that does not adequately address the unique characteristics of the bond market [8]. Ambiguity in "Materiality" Standards - The current judicial practice tends to generalize the concept of materiality in false statements, failing to adequately assess the actual impact of specific false information on the issuer's repayment ability [9]. Inadequate Adaptation of Fault Criteria - Existing rules for determining intermediary responsibility primarily target the stock market, lacking sufficient consideration of the bond market's reliance on repayment capacity information [10][11]. Lack of Standardization in Responsibility Determination - There is a long-standing imbalance between the supply of rules for determining intermediary responsibility and the demand for uniform adjudication, leading to significant discrepancies in liability allocation across similar cases [12][13]. Higher Risks in Recovery Mechanisms - Compared to the stock market, the feasibility of recovery for intermediaries in the bond market is significantly higher due to the nature of bond issuers, often leading to situations where recovery is nearly impossible [14]. Optimization of Adjudication Rules - Proposes a gradient responsibility model based on fault and causal force, aiming to provide operational standards for the allocation of intermediary responsibility in the bond market [15][16]. Dynamic Calculation Model for Responsibility Scope - Emphasizes the need for a dynamic calculation model to ensure that the scope of responsibility aligns with the degree of fault and causal force, enhancing the precision of liability allocation [17][18]. Innovation in Recovery Mechanisms - Suggests establishing a final responsibility distribution rule based on fault degree and causal force size, ensuring that true fault bearers are held accountable while preventing intermediaries from becoming the "risk sponge" for issuers' illegal activities [19][20]. Conclusion - The implementation of the new Securities Law marks a significant milestone in the marketization, legalization, and internationalization of China's capital market, necessitating a scientifically sound and predictable responsibility system to balance investor protection and market vitality [21].

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the liability for damages caused by false statements in the bond market, emphasizing the need to assess the nature of the false statement, the subjective fault of the defendant, the definition of investor losses, and the causal relationship [1][5][25]. Group 1: New Securities Law Impact - The revised Securities Law, effective from March 1, 2020, marks a significant milestone in the legal framework of China's capital market, balancing market efficiency with risk prevention [2][3]. - Key reforms include the implementation of a registration system, enhanced information disclosure, strengthened investor protection, and increased penalties for violations [3][4]. Group 2: Types of False Statements - False statements in the bond market can include false records, misleading statements, significant omissions, and improper disclosures, all of which violate the obligation of information disclosure [7][8]. - The essence of false statements is the violation of the information disclosure obligations by the issuer [6][8]. Group 3: Judicial Recognition of "Materiality" - The materiality of false statements is defined as information that would significantly impact a rational investor's decision-making [10]. - Courts focus on whether false statements directly affect the issuer's ability to repay debts, rather than short-term profitability [13]. Group 4: Liability Principles - The bond issuer bears fault-based liability for false statements, meaning they are responsible even if there was no intent to deceive [15][16]. - Controlling shareholders and actual controllers are presumed to have fault unless they can prove they did not participate in the false statements [17]. - Intermediary institutions also face presumed fault unless they can demonstrate due diligence in verifying the information [19]. Group 5: Investor Losses and Causation - Investors can claim compensation for actual losses due to false statements, including principal, interest, and reasonable expenses [21]. - Causation is divided into transaction causation and loss causation, with specific rules for proving each [22][25]. - Investors must provide evidence of their losses and the connection between the false statements and their losses [27][28]. Group 6: Practical Recommendations - Investors should preserve evidence of their bond purchases and losses, while issuers should strengthen compliance and risk isolation to mitigate potential litigation risks [24][29].

Core Viewpoint - The implementation of the new Securities Law over the past five years has significantly advanced the legal framework of the bond market in China, focusing on registration system reform and zero-tolerance regulation, thereby enhancing the bond market's ability to support national strategies and manage risks [1][2]. Group 1: Legal Foundation - The new Securities Law has unified the regulation of corporate credit bonds, eliminating regulatory arbitrage and establishing a solid legal foundation for the bond market [3]. - The transition from administrative approval to a market-based registration system has streamlined the bond issuance process, significantly reducing the time required for bond registration [4][5]. Group 2: Trading Mechanism - The breaking of rigid repayment guarantees has led to the establishment of a risk pricing mechanism, enhancing market efficiency and accountability [6][7][8]. - The bond market has seen a reduction in the rolling default rate from 0.88% in 2019 to 0.05% in 2023, indicating a shift towards rational pricing and maturity in the market [8]. Group 3: Regulatory Environment - The new Securities Law has increased penalties for securities violations, enhancing the deterrent effect against illegal activities and improving market integrity [9]. - The regulatory framework has been strengthened to ensure that securities service institutions are held accountable for the accuracy and completeness of their reports [9]. Group 4: Economic Support - The bond market has played a crucial role in stabilizing the economy during crises, such as the issuance of 1 trillion yuan in special bonds to counter the economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic [11]. - The rise of green bonds has supported the transition to a low-carbon economy, with issuance growing from 201.8 billion yuan in 2016 to 683.3 billion yuan by 2024 [12][13]. Group 5: Market Structure and Innovation - The bond market has diversified its product offerings, including the introduction of innovative instruments like tech innovation bonds and real estate investment trusts (REITs) [14][15]. - Technological advancements, such as blockchain, are being integrated into the bond market to enhance efficiency and transparency [15]. Group 6: Internationalization - The bond market has accelerated its internationalization, with the issuance of panda bonds and the establishment of cross-border investment mechanisms [16][17]. - The international influence of Chinese bonds has grown, with Chinese government bonds being included in major global bond indices [17]. Group 7: Future Outlook - The bond market must focus on risk prevention, regulatory openness, and technological empowerment to address challenges posed by global economic fluctuations and local debt pressures [19][20]. - Establishing a unified rating system and enhancing local government debt management are critical for maintaining market stability [20][21][22].

Group 1 - The new Securities Law enhances protection for small and medium investors by establishing a dedicated chapter on "Investor Protection" [1] - Key measures include a reversed burden of proof system for disputes between ordinary investors and securities companies, a shareholder rights solicitation system, a cash dividend system for listed companies, a pre-compensation system, and support for litigation by investor protection organizations [1] - The special representative litigation system, centered around the "declaration withdrawal system," represents a unique form of collective litigation in the Chinese securities market [1] Group 2 - The Zhejiang Investor Education Base promotes the principle of "communication creates value," focusing on interactive investor relations [1] - The base aims to provide financial information and services through a multimedia approach, actively exploring the "Internet + Investor Education" model [1] - The combination of online and offline methods makes investor education services more accessible [1]