Conclusion: yes. For personal insurance with a cash value bought during the marriage with community property, either spouse can ask on divorce for the policy's cash value to be divided; usually the policy rights go to the policyholder, who pays the other spouse half the cash value.
This report checks 6 current statutory provisions word for word (3 in the Civil Code, 1 in the Insurance Law, 2 in Interpretation (I) on the Marriage and Family Book) and 3 provisions of a conference minutes, and searches and checks 20 published judgments (1 high-court retrial review ruling, 4 appeal judgments and 15 first-instance judgments), grouping the rules into 6 situations.
Civil Code · Marriage and FamilyInsurance LawEighth Civil Trial Conference minutes20 full judgmentsScope and exceptions as set out in the text · page structure updated 2026-09-19 · statute check dates in the text
1. It can be divided. The cash value of personal insurance bought during the marriage with community property is community property and can be divided on divorce.
2. What is divided is the "cash value" — not "premiums paid", and not "insurance benefits". Claims to split premiums paid are usually not supported in practice; whether benefits are divisible depends on the type of insurance.
3. Two routes. If surrendered, the cash value returned by the insurer is divided as community property; if not, the policy rights go to the policyholder, who pays the other spouse half the cash value.
4. For policies taken out before the marriage and paid during it, only the part funded by community property is divided. Courts usually first deduct the cash value attributable to personal property, or apportion by the source of premiums.
5. Evidence and procedure are the practical keys. The spouse claiming division bears the burden of proving the cash value and can ask the court to obtain it from the insurer; a policy not dealt with in the divorce can be claimed in a later action, but not one already dealt with.
The following property acquired by spouses during the marriage is community property, jointly owned by the spouses: (1) wages, bonuses and remuneration for services; (2) income from production, business and investment; (3) income from intellectual property; (4) property inherited or received as a gift, except as provided in item (3) of Article 1063; (5) other property that should be jointly owned.
Spouses have equal rights to deal with community property.
The following is the separate property of one spouse: (1) property acquired before marriage; (2) compensation received for personal injury; (3) property designated for one spouse only in a will or gift contract; (4) articles for one spouse's personal daily use; (5) other property that should belong to one spouse.
On divorce, community property is dealt with by agreement of the spouses; failing agreement, the people's court decides according to the specific circumstances of the property and the principle of taking care of the interests of the children, the woman and the party not at fault.
The rights of the husband or wife in household land contract management shall be protected according to law.
Where the policyholder terminates the contract, the insurer shall, within thirty days of receiving notice of termination, refund the cash value of the policy as agreed in the contract.
Where insurance is bought during the marriage with community property, the policyholder and the insured are the same spouse, the policy is within its term at divorce and the policyholder does not wish to continue it, the cash value refunded by the insurer shall be treated as community property; where the policyholder chooses to continue the policy, the policyholder shall pay half of the policy's cash value to the other spouse.
Insurance benefits of a personal nature received during the marriage by one spouse as the insured under accident or health insurance, or by one spouse as beneficiary under life insurance payable on death, should be treated as separate property unless otherwise agreed.
Insurance benefits received during the marriage by one spouse under an insurance contract with a cash value payable on survival to a certain age should be treated as community property unless otherwise agreed.
In a personal insurance contract the policyholder is the party to the contract, and the insured and beneficiary generally are not. The rights to terminate the contract and to have the cash value refunded belong to the policyholder, not the insured or beneficiary.
Article 30. Military personnel's death and injury insurance benefits, disability allowances and medical and living allowances are separate property.
Article 83. Where, after divorce, one party sues to divide community property that has not been dealt with, and on review the property is indeed community property not addressed at the divorce, the people's court shall divide it according to law.
The minutes above are a conference summary issued by the Supreme People's Court (a judicial document), not a law or judicial interpretation; courts generally refer to them in their reasoning rather than citing them as the basis of the operative judgment. Neither Interpretation (I) on the Marriage and Family Book (91 articles) nor Interpretation (II) (Fa Shi [2025] No. 1, effective 1 February 2025) addresses dividing the cash value of commercial insurance. So the courts' approach still rests mainly on the minutes plus case-by-case fairness, and practice varies by region — which explains the split in situation 5 below.
Each rule is followed by the judgments found in this search; click to read the full text (in Chinese). Case numbers, courts and dates are from the published judgments.
The mainstream approach: first ask whether the premiums came from community property, then whether the policy has a cash value; if both, it is divided by cash value on divorce, the policy rights go to the policyholder, and the policyholder pays the other spouse compensation equal to half the cash value.
Where a policy was actually surrendered before or after the divorce, the cash value refunded by the insurer (surrender value) is divided directly as community property; where the policy is still in its payment period, only the cash value already accrued for completed policy years is dealt with.
Where a policy was bought before the marriage with personal property and premiums continued during the marriage, or premiums during the marriage came from community property, courts do not simply split the whole cash value in half; they first strip out the part attributable to personal property (the corresponding cash value or by share of premiums) and divide only the part attributable to community property.
Whether there is a cash value and whether the policy is personal in nature are the preconditions for division. Pure-protection and strongly personal policies are usually not divided; policies bought for the couple's children are mostly treated as gifts to the children and excluded from division.
Where the policyholder chooses to continue the policy, or neither spouse wants to continue but it has not actually been surrendered, courts are not consistent: some decline to divide for now and leave it to a later action after surrender; some give the policy to the policyholder while dividing the premiums paid; some simply confirm each spouse's share of the cash value.
A policy not dealt with at divorce can be divided in a later post-divorce property action; but if it was claimed and decided on the merits in the earlier case, a second claim is repeat litigation. The spouse claiming division bears the burden of proving the cash value and suffers the consequences of failing to do so.
| # | Case number (click for full text) | Court | Date | Level | Key point |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | (2021) 川1381民初1109号 | Langzhong People's Court, Nanchong, Sichuan | 2021-05-19 | First instance | Premarital policy paid from community property: premarital share deducted, remainder divided; 50% compensation. |
| 2 | (2020) 粤0106民初2332号 | Tianhe District People's Court, Guangzhou | 2021-01-12 | First instance | Cash value RMB 1,052,181.35 divided; RMB 526,090.68 to be paid. |
| 3 | (2022) 沪0116民初11595号 | Jinshan District People's Court, Shanghai | 2022-11-23 | First instance | Policy to the defendant, who pays RMB 16,623.01 in compensation. |
| 4 | (2022) 黑11民终1508号 | Heihe Intermediate People's Court, Heilongjiang | 2023-02-23 | Appeal | Savings / wealth-management insurance bought with community property is divided by cash value. |
| 5 | (2023) 京02民终4740号 | Beijing No. 2 Intermediate People's Court | 2023-06-20 | Appeal | Cash value at divorce is divisible; not claiming in the divorce is no waiver; "value at maturity" rejected as a basis. |
| 6 | (2023) 鲁1491民初461号 | Dezhou Economic and Technological Development Zone People's Court, Shandong | 2024-01-29 | First instance | 55%:45% split because one spouse hid and squandered community property (Civil Code Art. 1092). |
| 7 | (2024) 新0102民初2831号 | Tianshan District People's Court, Urumqi, Xinjiang | 2024-08-14 | First instance | Surrender value split equally; unexpired policy kept with half its cash value paid. |
| 8 | (2024) 粤0103民初11315号 | Liwan District People's Court, Guangzhou | 2024-07-29 | First instance | Agreeing to keep paying premiums = choosing to keep the policy; half the cash value owed; surrender proceeds netted off. |
| 9 | (2026) 鲁0405民初1463号 | Tai'erzhuang District People's Court, Zaozhuang, Shandong | 2026-06-09 | First instance | Accrued third-year cash value divided; fourth-year value not yet accrued. |
| 10 | (2020) 粤04民终1048号 | Zhuhai Intermediate People's Court, Guangdong | 2020-05-29 | Appeal | Apportioned by source of premiums: RMB 187,744.07. |
| 11 | (2020) 沪0115民初48715号 | Pudong New Area People's Court, Shanghai | 2020-11-09 | First instance | Premarital policy: only the growth in cash value is divided; cites the conference minutes. |
| 12 | (2023) 鲁1425民初4785号 | Qihe County People's Court, Dezhou, Shandong | 2023-12-12 | First instance | Medical / accident / critical illness = separate; savings policies divided (RMB 48,994.79). |
| 13 | (2020) 辽0804民初1474号 | Bayuquan District People's Court, Yingkou, Liaoning | 2020-09-25 | First instance | Children's policies not divided; spouse's policy: half of premiums returned. |
| 14 | (2022) 辽0682民初4559号 | Fengcheng People's Court, Dandong, Liaoning | 2022-09-26 | First instance | Not divided for now; later action after surrender. |
| 15 | (2024) 晋民申4891号 | Shanxi High People's Court | 2024-12-26 | Retrial review | Without surrender, dividing premiums paid (RMB 30,559.28) was not wrong. |
| 16 | (2024) 晋0110民初631号 | Jinyuan District People's Court, Taiyuan, Shanxi | 2024-05-28 | First instance | 50% shares of cash value confirmed, to be divided once known. |
| 17 | (2023) 内0204民初5133号 | Qingshan District People's Court, Baotou, Inner Mongolia | 2024-01-16 | First instance | Later action allowed; spouses' policies split; children's policies are gifts. |
| 18 | (2023) 粤01民终26895号 | Guangzhou Intermediate People's Court, Guangdong | 2023-12-28 | Appeal | Repeat claim on policies already decided = repeat litigation; orders set aside. |
| 19 | (2024) 川0903民初2297号 | Chuanshan District People's Court, Suining, Sichuan | 2024-07-02 | First instance | Surrender proceeds divided; unproved policies not dealt with. |
| 20 | (2020) 京0105民初9840号 | Chaoyang District People's Court, Beijing | 2021-03-16 | First instance | Cash value unproved: valued at premiums paid (RMB 60,000); RMB 30,000 compensation. |
Text types: all 20 are full published judgments; (2024) 晋民申4891号 is a high-court civil ruling on retrial review, and the rest are civil judgments (including 4 appeal judgments). The full-text pages only lay the text out in paragraphs without changing it.
1. Check two things first: does the policy have a cash value (savings, wealth-management, annuity, endowment and whole-life policies generally do; medical, accident and other pure-protection policies generally don't), and did the premiums come from community property? Without both, a claim to divide will fail.
2. Claim "division of the cash value", not "division of premiums paid". In the early years the cash value is far below premiums paid, so claiming premiums looks bigger, but courts generally reject it and may see it as an improper claim. That said, where the policy is not surrendered and the cash value cannot be established, a high court has accepted dividing premiums ((2024) 晋民申4891号), which can be an alternative claim.
3. The policy usually follows the policyholder; the insured and beneficiary do not acquire a right to the cash value. The spouse who keeps the policy pays the other half its cash value. If one spouse paid premiums from premarital personal property, that amount is first deducted from the base; for a premarital policy paid during the marriage, one can also argue for dividing only the growth in cash value or apportioning by premiums.
4. Policies for minor children are mostly treated as gifts to the children and not divided as marital property; for policies on parents or other third parties, the focus is whether the spouse knew and whether it was a necessary family expense — generally not divided if the spouse knew, but where one spouse secretly bought a large policy, the court may divide the premiums instead.
5. Evidence is key: the policy and cash value statements are usually held by the insurer, so the claimant should ask the court to obtain them or apply for an investigation order. Without that, the court may value the policy at premiums paid ((2020) 京0105民初9840号) or simply not deal with it ((2024) 川0903民初2297号).
6. Two procedural points: first, a policy not dealt with in the divorce can be claimed afterwards in a post-divorce property action (Interpretation (I) Art. 83), generally not subject to a one-year limit; second, if the same policy was claimed and dealt with in the divorce case, a new action will be dismissed as contrary to res judicata ((2023) 粤01民终26895号).
7. If the policy is still in its payment period at divorce and neither spouse wants to continue, consider expressly asking in the proceedings for surrender and division of the surrender value; claiming only "compensation" without surrender may lead some courts to decline to divide for now pending a later action ((2022) 辽0682民初4559号), prolonging the dispute.
1. Statutory text is from public statute databases, checked word for word; all are current versions.
2. The conference provisions are from the Minutes of the Eighth National Conference on Civil and Commercial Trial Work (civil part) (Fa [2016] No. 399, issued 21 November 2016).
3. Cases come from published court judgments and public information in the People's Court Case Database; this report only collects and presents court rules and is not a conclusive opinion on any specific case.
4. Report completed 11 September 2026. Outcomes vary by region, time and facts; check the latest approach before relying on this report in a specific case.
Wang Xin works in English and Mandarin. Phone +86-18601139509 · WeChat wang223040 · weekdays 9:00–18:00 China time (UTC+8).
Contact Wang Xin