Image: A Chinese military canine and demolition unit conducting a security sweep at Tiananmen Square. (Photo by Kevin Frayer/Getty Images)
[People News] Xi Jinping's anti-corruption campaign has undergone a significant shift. A recently released, seemingly minor document has quietly changed the threshold for criminalizing unexplained sources of wealth. While citizens can face imprisonment for receiving 30,000, officials hiding 3 million will not face any penalties. This new set of anti-corruption regulations from Xi Jinping, which creates a stark distinction between officials and the public, has sparked widespread outrage.
On April 10, 2026, the Supreme People's Procuratorate and the Supreme People's Court jointly issued the "Interpretation on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in Handling Criminal Cases of Corruption and Bribery (II)" (Legal Interpretation [2026] No. 6), set to take effect on May 1. This 24-article judicial interpretation has two main points of contention: for non-state employees (such as doctors, private sector executives, and ordinary workers) involved in bribery, embezzlement, and misappropriation of funds, the threshold for criminal charges has been uniformly set at 30,000; conversely, for state employees, the threshold for the crime of 'huge amounts of property with unknown sources' has dramatically increased from 300,000 to 3 million.
The difference in criminalisation thresholds between officials and citizens is staggering 100 times! In a matter of hours, the legal community, business circles, and social media platforms like Weibo and Zhihu were inundated with complaints. A law professor from City University of Hong Kong publicly remarked, 'So harsh on doctors, yet so lenient on officials.' Xi Jinping's differentiated approach to anti-corruption, which protects officials while targeting ordinary citizens, effectively provides a safety net for party officials while exposing the common people to harsh penalties.
The details that have ignited this public outcry are as follows:
The criminal liability threshold for doctors (or non-state personnel) is set at 30,000 yuan: Article 8 of 'Interpretation (II)' explicitly states that the conviction and sentencing standards for the crimes of bribery of non-state personnel under Article 163 of the Criminal Law, bribery of non-state personnel under Article 164, embezzlement under Article 271, and misappropriation of funds under Article 272 will follow the standards for bribery, bribery (including unit bribery), corruption, and misappropriation of public funds.
This establishes a uniform threshold of 30,000 yuan for serious offences. Previously, crimes involving private enterprises or non-public officials were often calculated at 2 or 5 times the amount, leading to actual thresholds being higher, such as 60,000 or 150,000 yuan. If a doctor accepts a red envelope or a benefit fee exceeding 30,000 yuan while working as non-state personnel in private hospitals or clinics, they can be held criminally liable, treating all non-public officials' job-related crimes equally.
For civil servants or state personnel, the threshold for criminal liability has been increased from 300,000 yuan to 3 million yuan: This primarily relates to Article 5, 'Crime of Unknown Source of Huge Property': If a state worker's property and expenditures significantly exceed their legal income, a difference of over 3 million yuan but less than 10 million yuan is classified as 'huge', while a difference exceeding 10 million yuan is classified as 'particularly huge'. Article 6, which addresses the concealment of overseas deposits, is also set at over 3 million yuan.
This represents blatant class and identity discrimination, extending the bloodline theory into the realm of punishment. Didn't we agree that everyone is equal before the law?
This constitutes absolutely unequal punishment; the same crime results in vastly different penalties. The judicial interpretations from the two high courts have effectively rendered the Criminal Law ineffective. Is this still a judicial interpretation? This is clearly a legislative interpretation, and the two high courts have completely overstepped their authority.
There is an even harsher measure that you might not expect; the Chinese Communist Party has enshrined it in strict legal statutes:
The criminalization of "thought bribery" in private enterprises has officially been implemented: Article 4 of the unit bribery crime explicitly states that "to seek improper benefits by bribing state personnel, if it falls under one of the two scenarios: the collective decision of the unit, with illegal gains belonging to the unit; or the actual controller or responsible personnel of the unit decides, with illegal gains belonging to the unit," it will be prosecuted as a unit bribery crime.
Article 23 and related recovery regulations state: "If the illicit funds or goods have not been delivered to the bribe-taker or have been returned to the briber, they shall be recovered from the briber according to the law; if the illicit funds or goods are held or stored by a third party, they shall be recovered from the third party according to the law." Even if the bribe money has not been delivered or the public servant has returned it, the prosecutorial authorities can still recover the "intended bribe amount" from private enterprises as illegal gains based on decision records, transfer vouchers, chat logs, and other evidence.
Private enterprise owners can be convicted for "taking 30,000 yuan from their own company": This also stems from Article 8 on "occupying duties," which refers to the standards of embezzlement: if the actual controller, senior management, or even employees of a private enterprise misappropriate company funds through methods such as "fabricating reasons" or "evading supervision," an amount of 30,000 yuan or more can constitute a crime.
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has effectively legalised the plundering of private enterprises, resulting in a blatant and legal form of robbery that disregards any sense of propriety. Previously, overseas operations targeting private business owners could lead to local protectionism and judicial disputes. However, now, if one merely thinks about bribery, the authorities can simply seize their money. While Elon Musk's brain-computer interface has yet to be implemented, the CCP's two high courts have already established a grand precedent for criminalizing thoughts. This is incredibly ironic! Hasn't this opened the floodgates for the CCP's abuse of power? If the CCP suspects you of intending to bribe, you are deemed guilty, and the amount involved is entirely at the CCP's discretion.
These new regulations have sparked outrage within legal and business communities. A lawyer's public account published an article asserting that these new rules effectively transform normal business transactions of private enterprises into ticking time bombs. Prominent law firms such as JunHe and King & Wood Mallesons have issued interpretations, warning that the 'business environment is deteriorating.' Business owners are privately expressing their concerns: in the past, they feared being choked by public authority, but now they worry that a simple transfer of funds from their accounts could serve as evidence against them. The legal blogger on Bilibili, 'Cai Yaqi Criminal Law,' released a video voicing serious concerns about these developments.
Since Xi Jinping took office 14 years ago, anti-corruption has been his most significant political asset. While he publicly claims to combat both minor and major corruption with zero tolerance, in reality, it is a selective and instrumental approach to anti-corruption. This strategy has become a tool for eliminating political rivals and maintaining his personal dictatorial power.
The recent amendment to the crime of unknown sources of large assets has significantly raised the threshold, effectively granting grassroots officials a 'get-out-of-jail-free card.' As long as they are not found guilty of specific acts of corruption or bribery, any unknown property below 3 million can be legalised. In stark contrast, private enterprises face a much lower threshold of 30,000 and stringent recovery rules, which effectively ties the private economy to the execution block. Xi Jinping frequently asserts 'two unwavering principles' and 'equal protection,' yet he employs legal mechanisms to exploit private enterprises and control society.
Even more ludicrous is the criminalisation of 'thought bribery.' Previously, bribery required actual payment to be considered a crime, but now merely having the 'intention to give' or leaving 'traces of collective decision-making' is sufficient for companies to face severe penalties. The procuratorate can pursue the recovery of 'proposed bribe funds' that have 'not yet been delivered,' even if the public officials have returned them. Who would dare to operate a private enterprise in this environment? Which private business would still risk engaging with the government? Local governments under the Communist Party of China owe private enterprises as much as 12 trillion, and now the two high courts have effectively handed them a knife to directly cut into their own flesh.
This is not anti-corruption; it is legalised robbery. The private sector contributes over 60% of GDP, 70% of tax revenue, and more than 80% of employment, yet it is treated as a primary target for exploitation by the Communist Party. With the economy declining, the confidence of the private sector is already fragile, and the introduction of these new regulations will only accelerate the collapse of private enterprises, capital flight, and the trend of 'lying flat.'
For over a decade, Xi Jinping's anti-corruption campaign has created an atmosphere of fear within the Communist Party's ranks, with officials feeling increasingly insecure. Rumors of officials collectively 'lying flat' or even secretly plotting to overthrow Xi Jinping have never ceased. The selective anti-corruption efforts over the past ten years were originally aimed at clearing the way for internal power struggles, but they have harmed the entire bureaucratic system. Xi is concerned about potential upheaval within the officialdom and has deliberately raised the threshold for criminalization, aiming to secure his own position while being able to effectively target political adversaries in the anti-corruption campaign.
Furthermore, the systemic corruption within the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has become a normalised phenomenon, with patterns of corruption continuously evolving and escalating. The 300,000 yuan threshold for initiating cases, established by the Supreme People's Procuratorate in 1999, if still applied, would lead to the near-total downfall of nearly ten million civil servants within the system. The idea of arresting and sentencing all officials is no longer a far-fetched notion but a stark reality.
The existing legal framework is incapable of addressing the structural and normalised corruption within the CCP; it can only raise thresholds to collectively 'lighten the load' for the entire ruling group. This effectively acknowledges that anti-corruption efforts have reached the limit of 'the law does not punish the masses.' Xi Jinping can only ease restrictions on himself; otherwise, the Great Wall will be completely dismantled. This represents a self-amnesty by the ruling group, executed in a targeted and timely manner, while also transitioning anti-corruption from a 'campaign-style' approach to a 'controllable, graded' strategy. Lighter penalties can be applied to allies and neutral parties, while severe charges are reserved for political adversaries, distinguishing between friends and foes, reshaping political loyalty, and avoiding a 'one-size-fits-all' approach that could jeopardise the entire system.
What strategy is Xi Jinping employing with this dual approach of loosening restrictions on officials while tightening control over the populace? The underlying motivations are complex; he seeks to stabilise the regime, keep the machinery functioning, maintain the political narrative of 'anti-corruption is always ongoing' amid economic pressures, and simultaneously turn private enterprises into scapegoats and sources of revenue. Ultimately, this reflects the inevitable logic of the CCP's one-party rule, and Xi Jinping and the CCP regime are rapidly descending into a death spiral, with the pace of self-destruction accelerating, and there is no turning back.
(First published by People News) △
News magazine bootstrap themes!
I like this themes, fast loading and look profesional
Thank you Carlos!
You're welcome!
Please support me with give positive rating!
Yes Sure!