[Epoch Times on January 9, 2022](Reported by Li Siqi, a reporter from The Epoch Times Department of Special Issues) On January 4, the new version of the CCP’s Cyber Security Review Measures was issued; on January 5, the Anti-Monopoly Bureau of the State Administration for Market Supervision and Administration of the Communist Party of China issued Of the 13 administrative penalty decisions, 12 were related to network technology companies. Just entering 2022, Chinese Internet companies have encountered strong regulatory signals.
The Cyberspace Administration China (Cyberspace Administration China, referred to as the Cyberspace Administration) adopted in November 2021 the “Cyberspace Review Measures” (referred to as the “Measures”), which was announced on January 4 after the approval of the other 12 departments of the CCP. The new version of the “Measures” will be formally implemented on February 15, and the old version will be abolished at the same time. Article 7 of the new version stipulates: “Online platform operators who have personal information of more than 1 million users going to list abroad must report to the Cybersecurity Review Office for a cybersecurity review.”
The old version of the “Measures” did not explicitly mention “listing”. In addition to adding restrictions on “listing”, the new version of the “Measures” also included the China Securities Regulatory Commission as one of the competent authorities for review in Article 4.
For Chinese Internet companies, the threshold of “1 million users’ personal information” is not high. Refer to the analysis report of the monthly active users (monthly active users) of mobile mini programs in December 2021 by China’s comprehensive service company for technology innovation and entrepreneurship, “36氪”, as of October 2021, the number of mini programs with more than 1 million monthly active users It has broken through 1335. The number of monthly active users accounts for only a small part of the number of registered mobile mini programs. According to a report by AppsFlyer, a global marketing measurement and experience management platform, the retention rate for Chinese people on the 30th day of using mobile mini programs is only 1.22%.
Radio Free Asia reported on January 4 that Jiang Yaqi, an associate professor at the Institute of Intellectual Property Rights at Taipei University of Technology, Taiwan, believes that 1 million probably includes all companies that may be listed overseas for financing.
The quantity standard of “1 million users’ personal information” is consistent with Article 37 of the “Network Data Security Management Regulations (Draft for Comment)” (referred to as the “Regulations for Opinion Draft”). On November 14, 2021, the Cyberspace Administration of the Communist Party of China issued the Draft Regulations. The second point of Article 37 states: critical information infrastructure operators and data processors processing personal information of more than 1 million people The provision of personal information abroad shall pass the data outbound security assessment organized by the national cybersecurity and informatization department.
The new version of the “Measures” mentions “foreign listings” and does not mention Hong Kong. However, the third point of Article 13 of the “Draft Opinions” states that “data processors going to Hong Kong to list, affecting or likely to affect national security” should apply for cyber security review in accordance with relevant national regulations. Therefore, network platform operators with “personal information of 1 million users” are faced with the issue of network security review, whether they go overseas or go public in Hong Kong, but the specific operation methods may be different.
On the second day after the “Measures” was announced, Chinese Internet giants suffered the first penalty in 2022. On January 5, the Anti-Monopoly Bureau of the State Administration of Market Supervision and Administration of the Communist Party of China issued a total of 13 administrative penalty decisions. The parties in each case were fined 500,000 yuan (approximately US$80,000) in accordance with the Anti-Monopoly Law. Upper limit. Tencent Holdings (0700.HK, referred to as “Tencent”) involved the most, with 9 cases in total, with a total fine of 4.5 million yuan (approximately US$720,000); Alibaba Group Holdings Limited (9988.HK, referred to as “Alibaba”) ) Two cases were involved, with a total fine of 1 million yuan (approximately US$160,000). The last time an “antitrust” fine was imposed on November 20, 2021, Tencent and Alibaba were fined a total of 10.5 million yuan (about 1.68 million U.S. dollars).
According to Soochow Securities, as of January 6 this year, there are 47 listed companies that Tencent mainly holds shares, and there are 7 listed companies holding more than 20% of the shares, mainly in the software, service, media and diversified financial industries. . Compared with Tencent, the number of listed companies that Alibaba mainly holds shares is slightly lower, at 40, and there are 9 listed companies with a shareholding ratio of more than 20%, but the scope of investment is wider than Tencent. In addition to software, services and media, Alibaba has invested in healthcare equipment and services, food and major supplies retail, finance, telecommunications, and real estate and transportation industries.
After sorting out the major listed companies held by Tencent and Alibaba, Soochow Securities reminded that “the industry is greatly affected by regulatory policies, and further strengthening of anti-monopoly policies and strengthening of capital disorderly expansion policies will have a significant impact on the development of the industry”.
At the end of December 2021, Tencent had “distributed dividends” to reduce its holdings of Jingdong Group (9618.HK) shares, giving up its status as a major shareholder. This move was regarded by the industry and analysts as Tencent’s forced response in the context of the Chinese Communist Party’s anti-monopoly. According to a Reuters report, Hou Jiyong, the founding partner of China Fengyun Capital, believes that Tencent is considering “anti-monopoly and preventing the disorderly expansion of capital” at the policy level.
Tencent took a stake in JD.com in 2014, turned enemies into friends, and jointly competed with Alibaba, ending the layout of China’s e-commerce tripartite rivalry that year. Now Tencent is forced to abandon its status as a major shareholder of JD.com, and its shareholding ratio has dropped from about 17% to about 2.3%.
Editor in charge: Lian Shuhua#
.