China (People’s Republic of)

Overall determination on the legal framework: In Place

China’s legal framework implementing the AEOI Standard is in place and is consistent with the requirements of the AEOI Terms of Reference. This includes China’s domestic legislative framework requiring Reporting Financial Institutions to conduct the due diligence and reporting procedures (CR1) and its international legal framework to exchange the information with all of China’s Interested Appropriate Partners (CR2).

The methodology used for the peer reviews and that therefore underpins this report is outlined in Chapter 2.

China commenced exchanges under the AEOI Standard in 2018.

In order to provide for Reporting Financial Institutions to collect and report the information to be exchanged, China:

  • issued the Regulations of Due Diligence on Financial Accounts of Non-residents for Tax Purposes; and

  • published further guidance, which is legally binding.

Under this framework Reporting Financial Institutions were required to commence the due diligence procedures in relation to New Accounts from 1 July 2017. With respect to Preexisting Accounts, Reporting Financial Institutions were required to complete the due diligence procedures on High Value Individual Accounts by 31 December 2017 and on Lower Value Individual Accounts and Entity Accounts by 31 December 2018.

During the initial Global Forum peer review, China made various amendments to its legislative framework, the last of which was effective from 16 September 2020.

With respect to the exchange of information under the AEOI Standard, China:

  • is a Party to the Convention on Mutual Administrative Assistance in Tax Matters and activated the associated CRS Multilateral Competent Authority Agreement in time for exchanges in 2018; and

  • put in place a bilateral agreement.1

The detailed findings for China are below, organised per Core Requirement (CR) and sub-requirement (SR), as extracted from the AEOI Terms of Reference (www.oecd.org/tax/transparency/documents/aeoi-terms-of-reference.pdf).

Determination: In Place

China’s domestic legislative framework is in place and contains all of the key aspects of the CRS and its Commentary requiring Reporting Financial Institutions to conduct the due diligence and reporting procedures (SRs 1.1 – 1.3). It also provides for a framework to enforce the requirements (SR 1.4).

SR 1.1 Jurisdictions should define the scope of Reporting Financial Institutions consistently with the CRS.

China has defined the scope of Reporting Financial Institutions in its domestic legislative framework in accordance with the CRS and its Commentary.

Recommendations:

No recommendations made.

SR 1.2 Jurisdictions should define the scope of Financial Accounts and Reportable Accounts consistently with the CRS and incorporate the due diligence procedures to identify them.

China has defined the scope of the Financial Accounts that are required to be reported in its domestic legislative framework and incorporated the due diligence procedures that must be applied to identify them in accordance with the CRS and its Commentary.

Recommendations:

No recommendations made.

SR 1.3 Jurisdictions should incorporate the reporting requirements contained in Section I of the CRS into their domestic legislative framework.

China has incorporated the reporting requirements in its domestic legislative framework in accordance with the CRS and its Commentary.

Recommendations:

No recommendations made.

SR 1.4 Jurisdictions should have a legislative framework in place that allows for the enforcement of the requirements of the CRS in practice.

China has a legislative framework in place to enforce the requirements in accordance with the CRS and its Commentary.

Recommendations:

No recommendations made.

Determination: In Place

China’s international legal framework to exchange the information is in place and consistent with the Model CAA and its Commentary and provides for exchange with all of China’s Interested Appropriate Partners (i.e. all jurisdictions that are interested in receiving information from China and that meet the required standard in relation to confidentiality and data safeguards). (SRs 2.1 – 2.3)

SR 2.1 Jurisdictions should have exchange agreements in effect with all Interested Appropriate Partners that permit the automatic exchange of CRS information.

China has exchange agreements that permit the automatic exchange of CRS information in effect with all its Interested Appropriate Partners.

Recommendations:

No recommendations made.

SR 2.2 Such an exchange agreement should be put in place without undue delay, following the receipt of an expression of interest from an Interested Appropriate Partner.

China put in place its exchange agreements without undue delay.

Recommendations:

No recommendations made.

SR 2.3 Jurisdictions should ensure that the exchange agreements in effect provide for the exchange of information in accordance with the requirements of the Model CAA.

China’s exchange agreements provide for the exchange of information in accordance with the requirements of the Model CAA.

Recommendations:

No recommendations made.

No comments made.

Note

← 1. With Hong Kong (China).

Metadata, Legal and Rights

This document, as well as any data and map included herein, are without prejudice to the status of or sovereignty over any territory, to the delimitation of international frontiers and boundaries and to the name of any territory, city or area. Extracts from publications may be subject to additional disclaimers, which are set out in the complete version of the publication, available at the link provided.

© OECD 2020

The use of this work, whether digital or print, is governed by the Terms and Conditions to be found at http://www.oecd.org/termsandconditions.