1月23日金融一线消息，中国人民银行江西省分行行政处罚决定信息公示表（赣银罚决字〔2026〕1—2 号）显示，江西赣昌农村商业银行股份有限公司因存在6项违法违规行为，被警告并处以罚款258.52万 元。罚单涉及违法行为类型如下：1．违反金融统计相关规定；2．违反支付结算业务管理规定；3．违 反金融科技管理规定；4．违反反假货币业务管理规定；5．占压财政存款或者资金；6．违反信用信息 采集、提供、查询及相关管理规定。 同时，蔡某红（江西赣昌农村商业银行股份有限公司运营管理中心）因对违反支付结算业务管理规定负 有责任，被处以罚款1万元。 | | | | | 中国人民银行江西省分行行政处罚信息公示表(爵银罚决字(2026) 1-2号) | | | | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | 昆号 | 当事人名称 | 行政处罚决定书 文号 | 选五行为英国 | 行政处罚内容 | 作出行政处罚决 作出行政处罚决 定机关名称 | 定日期 | 公示朋眼(自公示 景注 之日起计算》 | | | | | 1. 连反金融院计相关规定! "我都在解放了就像在此没带。" ...

2026年1月6日，国家金融监督管理总局江苏监管局发布行政处罚信息公开表，工商银行宝应支行和苏州 吴中支行领罚单。 因存款和贷款业务未严格分离的主要违法违规行为，工商银行宝应支行被江苏金融监管局罚款30万元； 郭伟（时任工商银行宝应支行行长助理）被江苏金融监管局警告并罚款6万元。 因收取不合理费用的主要违法违规行为，工商银行苏州吴中支行被江苏金融监管局罚款30万元；陈家玮 （工商银行苏州吴中支行副行长）被江苏金融监管局警告并罚款6万元。 行政处罚信息公开表原文： 行政处罚信息公开表原文： | 序 | 当事人名 | 行政处罚决定 | 主要违法违规行为 | 行政处罚 | 作出决定 | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | 름 | 称 | 书文号 | | 内容 | 机关 | | ﺎ | 中国工商 银行股份 | 苏金罚决字 | 存款和贷款业务未严 | 罚款30万 | 江苏金融 | | | | (2025) 167 | | | | | | 有限公司 | ਵੇ | 格分离 | 元 | 监管局 | | | 宝应支行 | | | | | | 2 | 郭伟(时 任中国工 商银行股 | ...

Group 1 - The People's Bank of China, Gansu Branch, has publicly announced an administrative penalty against Zhangxian Rural Credit Cooperative for violating financial statistical management regulations, payment settlement management regulations, and financial technology management regulations, resulting in a warning and a fine of 221,100 yuan [1][3][5]

Core Insights - In 2025, regulatory bodies issued a total of 6,521 penalties against banking institutions and personnel, a decrease of 0.81% compared to 2024 [1] - The total amount of fines reached 2.641 billion yuan, with institutions fined 2.575 billion yuan and individuals 67 million yuan, marking an increase of 44.95% from 2024 [1] - A total of 1,094 banks were penalized, which is an increase of 25 banks from the previous year [1] Regulatory Actions - The regulatory agencies strictly implemented the "double penalty system," holding both institutions and individuals accountable for violations [1] - The most common type of penalty for institutions was fines, while warnings were the most frequent penalty for individuals [1]

Core Viewpoint - The Hunan branch of Bank of Communications has been penalized for inadequate loan management and improper financial dealings with clients, resulting in a fine of 1.9 million yuan and the confiscation of illegal gains amounting to 1,757.58 yuan [1] Summary by Categories Regulatory Actions - The Hunan Financial Regulatory Bureau imposed a fine of 1.9 million yuan on the Hunan branch of Bank of Communications for failing to manage loans properly and for employees engaging in abnormal financial transactions with clients [1] - The regulatory body also confiscated illegal gains of 1,757.58 yuan from the bank [1] Responsible Individuals - Warnings were issued to several individuals responsible for the violations, including Gong Qing, Guo Xin, Li Jie, Zhao Yujun, Liao Taotao, and Yang Xiaoxiang [1]

Core Viewpoint - Chengdu Bank Co., Ltd. has been fined for imprudent management of loans, deposits, discount, and bill business, totaling 90,000 yuan for the bank itself and 6.35 million yuan for 15 branches [1][2][3] Summary by Category Penalties - Chengdu Bank Co., Ltd. was fined 90,000 yuan for improper management practices related to loans, deposits, discount, and bill business [1][2] - A total of 6.35 million yuan in fines was imposed on 15 branches of Chengdu Bank, including Mianyang, Meishan, Tianfu New Area, and others [1][2] - Individual penalties totaling 730,000 yuan were issued to 13 responsible persons for similar management issues [1][2][3]

Group 1 - The People's Bank of China Guigang Branch imposed administrative penalties on Agricultural Bank of China Guigang Branch for two violations: breaching account management regulations and failing to fulfill customer identity verification obligations [1][3] - The penalties include a warning and a fine of 289,000 yuan for the bank, while two employees, Xu and Liang, were fined 14,000 yuan each for their direct responsibility in the identity verification violation [1][3] Group 2 - Agricultural Bank of China reported a revenue of 550.88 billion yuan for the first three quarters of 2025, representing a year-on-year increase of 1.97% [1] - The bank achieved a net profit attributable to shareholders of 220.86 billion yuan, reflecting a year-on-year growth of 3.03% [1]

Group 1 - Shenzhen Financial Regulatory Bureau issued three fines in November, with one bank fined over 3 million yuan [1][6] - China Export & Credit Insurance Corporation Shenzhen Branch was fined 110,000 yuan for not using approved insurance terms and inadequate risk management [1][3] - Guangdong Huaxing Bank Shenzhen Branch faced multiple penalties this year, including a fine of 600,000 yuan for improper discounting practices and inflated deposits [4][5] Group 2 - Zhejiang Commercial Bank Shenzhen Branch was fined 3.3 million yuan due to inadequate pre-loan investigations and poor credit management [6][7] - A total of nine responsible individuals from Zhejiang Commercial Bank were penalized, with fines ranging from 5,000 to 6,000 yuan [6][7] - The bank has been operational since April 2010 and is the first branch established by Zhejiang Commercial Bank outside of Zhejiang Province [7]

Group 1 - The National Financial Supervision Administration has imposed a fine of 3 million yuan on Zhongzai Asset Management Co., Ltd. for failing to properly utilize insurance company funds [1] - Related personnel, including Liu Fan, Zhou Jinrong, Liu Feng, and Lu Jie, received warnings and fines totaling 230,000 yuan [1]

Core Points - The People's Bank of China issued a warning and fined CITIC Bank 15.357 million yuan for multiple regulatory violations [1] Summary by Categories Regulatory Violations - CITIC Bank violated financial statistical regulations [1] - The bank breached account management regulations [1] - There were violations related to counterfeit currency management [1] - The bank was found to have withheld fiscal deposits or funds [1] - Violations occurred in the collection, provision, inquiry, and management of credit information [1] - The bank failed to fulfill customer identity verification obligations as required [1] - There was non-compliance in retaining customer identity data and transaction records [1] Penalty Details - The administrative penalty decision was made on September 22, 2025 [1]