Criminal Liability For Insider Trading In Chinese Stock Markets
I. Legal Framework for Insider Trading in China
Criminal Law of the PRC
Article 180 (Insider Trading and Market Manipulation): Criminalizes trading based on non-public, material information, or tipping others for personal gain.
Article 181: Punishes those who manipulate stock markets for profits or influence stock prices illegally.
Securities Law of the PRC (2019 Amendment)
Requires disclosure obligations for listed companies.
Prohibits insiders (board members, executives, major shareholders) from trading based on non-public information.
Key Principle:
Insider trading is a criminal offense if it involves profit from confidential information or causes market harm. Sentences can include imprisonment, fines, and confiscation of illicit gains.
II. Detailed Cases of Insider Trading
Case 1: China Petroleum Executive Insider Trading (2008)
Background: Senior executive at a state-owned enterprise traded shares before a public announcement of major oil field discoveries.
Mechanism of Crime: Used confidential corporate information to buy shares, making substantial profits.
Charges: Insider trading under Criminal Law Article 180.
Outcome:
Executive sentenced to 3 years imprisonment.
Fines imposed, and profits confiscated.
Significance: First major crackdown on insider trading among state-owned enterprise executives.
Case 2: Shanghai Real Estate Insider Trading (2010)
Background: Board members of a listed property company sold shares ahead of a profit warning announcement.
Mechanism of Crime: Privileged knowledge of declining quarterly earnings used for personal gain.
Charges: Insider trading and violation of Securities Law.
Outcome:
Each board member received 2–4 years imprisonment.
Orders to return illicit gains.
Significance: Demonstrates liability for executives misusing financial forecasts.
Case 3: Shenzhen Technology Stock Case (2013)
Background: Mid-level managers purchased company stock prior to the announcement of a lucrative government contract.
Mechanism of Crime: Accessed confidential internal reports, tipping friends and family.
Charges: Insider trading and profit from non-public information.
Outcome:
Managers sentenced to 1–3 years imprisonment.
Fines proportional to profits obtained.
Significance: Highlights prosecution of non-top executives and their networks.
Case 4: Bank of China Insider Trading Ring (2015)
Background: Employees of a major bank used confidential merger information to trade stocks of affected companies.
Mechanism of Crime: Sold shares before market-sensitive announcements, avoiding losses and generating profits.
Charges: Insider trading and market manipulation.
Outcome:
Multiple employees received 3–5 years imprisonment.
Assets and illicit profits confiscated.
Significance: Shows coordinated insider trading rings are targeted by authorities.
Case 5: Pharmaceutical Company Executive Case (2017)
Background: CEO and CFO purchased company shares prior to announcing successful clinical trial results.
Mechanism of Crime: Used non-public information to gain substantial profit before market reacted.
Charges: Insider trading.
Outcome:
CEO sentenced to 4 years, CFO to 3 years.
Illicit profits returned and fines imposed.
Significance: Demonstrates enforcement against top executives in high-value sectors like pharmaceuticals.
Case 6: Cross-Border Insider Trading – Export Company (2018)
Background: Executives of a Chinese export company traded on both domestic and Hong Kong stock exchanges using confidential financial data.
Mechanism of Crime: Leveraged information about upcoming export subsidies.
Charges: Insider trading, cross-border securities violation.
Outcome:
Executives sentenced to 4–6 years imprisonment.
Profits confiscated and fines imposed.
Significance: Illustrates China's ability to prosecute cross-border insider trading.
Case 7: Technology Startup IPO Insider Trading (2020)
Background: Employees and advisors purchased shares before the company’s IPO after learning of favorable valuation details.
Mechanism of Crime: Privileged information on IPO pricing and allocation used for personal gain.
Charges: Insider trading under Criminal Law and Securities Law.
Outcome:
Sentences ranged from 1–3 years imprisonment.
Gains confiscated.
Significance: Highlights legal protection of IPO processes and fair market access.
III. Patterns Across Cases
Perpetrators: Executives, board members, mid-level managers, employees, and sometimes advisors.
Mechanisms: Trading on non-public financial information, corporate announcements, mergers, IPOs, or government contracts.
Punishment: Imprisonment (1–6 years), fines, confiscation of profits, and sometimes return of illicit gains.
Cross-Border Implications: Insider trading involving foreign markets triggers stricter scrutiny and criminal liability.
Enforcement Trend: China increasingly prosecutes high-profile executives to deter insider trading and maintain market fairness.
IV. Conclusion
Criminal liability for insider trading in Chinese stock markets is strict and multi-tiered, covering:
Individuals: Executives, managers, and employees misusing confidential information.
Profits: Confiscation of illicit gains is a key enforcement tool.
Sentences: 1–6 years imprisonment depending on severity, scale, and harm to market integrity.
Goal: Maintain investor confidence, ensure fairness, and protect market stability.
RELATED Blog
comments