Taking a RMB 30,000 Kickback Can Mean Prison: China Lowered the Thresholds for Private-Sector Corruption From 1 May 2026

The short answer

• From 1 May 2026, the conviction and sentencing thresholds for bribery by non-state functionaries, job embezzlement, misappropriation of funds and bribing non-state functionaries now follow those for bribery, embezzlement (by public officials), misappropriation of public funds and offering bribes respectively — the old “two times / five times” conversion rule has been abolished.
• In money terms: the threshold for bribery by non-state functionaries and job embezzlement falls from RMB 60,000 to 30,000, “huge amount” from RMB 1 million to 200,000, and RMB 3 million or more becomes “especially huge”; for bribing non-state functionaries, an individual offering RMB 30,000 can be prosecuted, previously RMB 60,000.
• This isn’t a blade aimed only at employees. Owners who divert company money for other uses or put it in their own pockets are subject to the new standards too; in practice those who report are often not employees but other shareholders and partners.
• Note the words “follow”: RMB 30,000 is a threshold at which criminal liability may arise, not a guaranteed conviction. The same article requires consideration of the nature, circumstances and social harm of the offence so that punishment fits the crime.
• The new standards apply only to conduct after 1 May 2026; earlier conduct is judged by the standards in force at the time.

Which document changed?

The Supreme People’s Court and Supreme People’s Procuratorate Interpretation (II) on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in Handling Criminal Cases of Embezzlement and Bribery, 法释〔2026〕6号, published on 10 April 2026 and in force from 1 May 2026. Article 8 is directly relevant to private-company staff:

“The conviction and sentencing standards for the crime of bribery by non-state functionaries under Article 163, bribing non-state functionaries under Article 164, job embezzlement under Article 271 and misappropriation of funds under Article 272 of the Criminal Law shall follow those for accepting bribes, offering bribes (unit bribery), embezzlement and misappropriation of public funds respectively. In deciding whether to pursue criminal liability and on sentencing, the nature and circumstances of the crime shall be considered comprehensively and its social harm accurately assessed, ensuring that punishment fits the crime.”

Article 24 provides that earlier judicial interpretations inconsistent with it are superseded. In other words, the “two times / five times” conversion rule in the 2016 interpretation is gone.

What was the line before?

Article 11 of the Supreme People’s Court and Supreme People’s Procuratorate Interpretation on Embezzlement and Bribery Cases (法释〔2016〕9号) (excerpt): “The starting amounts for ‘relatively large’ and ‘huge’ in bribery by non-state functionaries under Article 163 and job embezzlement under Article 271 shall be two times and five times the corresponding amounts for accepting bribes and embezzlement under this Interpretation.”

For bribery and embezzlement by public officials, “relatively large” starts at RMB 30,000 and “huge” at RMB 200,000. Multiplied by two and five, the private-sector thresholds became RMB 60,000 and RMB 1 million — several times higher than for public officials. Many internal kickback and embezzlement cases at companies got stuck on that high line. The new interpretation removes the multipliers and levels both sides.

Old vs new thresholds

• Bribery by non-state functionaries (Criminal Law Art. 163): “relatively large” from RMB 60,000 to 30,000; “huge” from RMB 1 million to 200,000; RMB 3 million or more is “especially huge”. Accepting kickbacks or handling fees under any name for personal use in economic dealings is also handled under this article.
• Job embezzlement (Art. 271): in step with the above — RMB 30,000, 200,000 and 3 million.
• Bribing non-state functionaries (Art. 164): the “relatively large” threshold for individuals falls from RMB 60,000 to 30,000; “huge” from RMB 2 million to 1 million.
• Misappropriation of funds (Art. 272): follows misappropriation of public funds — from RMB 30,000 when used for illegal activities; RMB 50,000 when used for profit-making activities or not repaid for more than three months.

Why didn’t filing and conviction thresholds match before?

Because they were set by different documents. Article 10 of the Supreme People’s Procuratorate and Ministry of Public Security Provisions on Standards for Filing and Prosecuting Criminal Cases (II) (excerpt): “Staff of companies, enterprises or other units who take advantage of their position to solicit or illegally accept property from others and seek benefits for them … where the amount is RMB 30,000 or more, shall be filed for prosecution.” So police had long been filing cases at RMB 30,000.

But courts convicted and sentenced using the 2016 interpretation’s RMB 60,000 and 1 million. That created a common gap: police opened a case and imposed compulsory measures, only for it to emerge at trial that the conviction threshold wasn’t met. My summary: Article 8 of Interpretation (II) unifies the amount thresholds across administrative enforcement, investigation and trial, narrowing the room for a “not enough money” defense; but because Article 8 also requires a comprehensive assessment of social harm, cases with minor circumstances where the proceeds have been returned may still have a chance of conditional non-prosecution or exemption from punishment.

Why the blade also reaches owners

For employees, the risk points are concrete: taking rebates or kickbacks from suppliers or customers in purchasing, tendering or sales; once the amount reaches RMB 30,000, the company can report it and police can lawfully open a case. Article 163(2) specifically provides that accepting kickbacks or handling fees under any name for personal use in economic dealings, by taking advantage of one’s position and in breach of state regulations, is punished under paragraph 1.

For owners, the risk is often overlooked. The subjects of job embezzlement and misappropriation of funds are “staff of companies, enterprises or other units” — major shareholders, actual controllers and legal representatives included. Mixing company and personal accounts, long-term shareholder loans never repaid, moving company funds at will — under the old RMB 1 million standard these rarely reached criminal proceedings; with the line now at RMB 30,000 and 200,000, their nature may change. And in practice, the complainant is usually not an employee but a disaffected shareholder or a departing partner.

A case mentioned in my video material (unverified)

In a video I described a type of case: years ago, a person was accused of defrauding a company of five or six million yuan, but the case never went anywhere; later, as general manager of another company, she demanded a RMB 300,000 kickback and was prosecuted, and under the then standard that “only RMB 1 million counts as huge”, she was sentenced to just thirteen months. This account is from memory, with no case number or judgment; I haven’t verified it, and it is used only to illustrate the gap between the old and new standards, not as case fact. If the same facts occurred after 1 May 2026, RMB 300,000 would fall within the “huge amount” band.

Action checklist

• Employees: don’t accept kickbacks, rebates or handling fees on the ground that “it’s industry practice”. A supplier rebate paid into and booked by the company is legally completely different from money in your own pocket.
• Companies: write clear internal rules on commissions, rebates and entertainment expenses and keep records; off-book accounts and using personal accounts to receive or pay company money are high-risk acts for findings of job embezzlement or misappropriation.
• Shareholders and partners: if you notice irregular company funds, first secure bank statements, books and audit leads, then decide between civil and criminal routes.
• Those already under investigation: focus on verifying three things — whether the money went to the individual, whether a position was used, and whether there was genuine consideration (for example, real intermediary services were provided).

Limitations and reminders

First, RMB 30,000 and 200,000 are starting amounts, not sentences; whether there can be non-prosecution or probation depends on restitution, guilty pleas, voluntary disclosure and the whole case. Second, the statutory and interpretive texts cited follow the official published versions; some are excerpts, and omissions don’t change the meaning; parts marked “my summary” are my understanding, not the text. Third, Interpretation (II) takes effect on 1 May 2026; conduct before then is still judged by the standards at the time — don’t use the new standards to re-judge old cases.

If you face issues with criminal exposure of company staff, shareholder disputes or criminal defense, contact Wang Xin: phone +86 186-0113-9509, WeChat wang223040.

This is an English edition of Wang Xin’s original Chinese article, 收回扣3万元就可能坐牢——2026年5月1日起，民营企业内部腐败的数额标准降了. It explains the law of the People’s Republic of China in general terms and is not legal advice for any particular case; outcomes depend on the specific facts and on how local authorities apply the rules.