On February 24, 2026, China’s State Administration for Market Regulation (SAMR) officially issued the Regulation on the Protection of Trade Secrets (hereinafter “the Regulation”), effective June 1, 2026. The new Regulation will replace the 1995 Provisions on Prohibiting Infringement of Trade Secrets. This marks the most significant update to China’s administrative trade secret protection framework in nearly three decades. 

The Regulation follows the 2017 and 2019 amendments to the Anti-Unfair Competition Law and the 2025 Draft for public comment. With its formal adoption, China further strengthens regulatory oversight of trade secret misappropriation, enhances enforcement capacity, and provides businesses with a clearer and more operational administrative remedy system. Below are the key highlights.

1. A Clearer and More Structured Definition of Trade Secrets

Article 5 provides a clear and precise definition of trade secrets as technical, operational, or other business information that is not known to the public, commercially valuable, and subject to appropriate confidentiality measures taken by the rights holder. Articles 6, 7, and 9 further clarify the standards for each of these three core elements: "not known to the public," "possesses commercial value," and "subject to appropriate confidentiality measures". This provides more predictable criteria for corporate compliance and administrative enforcement.

2. A More Comprehensive Framework for Identifying Infringement

Articles 10–13 set out detailed rules for determining trade secret infringement. Article 10 explicitly defines “improper means” to include theft, bribery, fraud, coercion, and electronic intrusion, along with enumerating other typical scenarios. Article 11 prohibits disclosure, use, or allowing third parties to use trade secrets obtained through improper means, and clarifies what constitutes “disclosure” and “use.” Article 12 forbids the violation of confidentiality obligations or confidentiality requirements, listing specific circumstances including contractual agreements, industry practices, rights holders’ demands, and restrictions of rules and regulations. Liability also extends to indirect infringement in Article 13. This includes inducing, instigating, or assisting others in misappropriation, such as inducement by offering material rewards. In Article 15, it makes clear that independent development, reverse engineering, or information obtained through legitimate public channels does not constitute infringement.

3. A Fully Structured Administrative Enforcement System

The Regulation establishes a comprehensive administrative enforcement mechanism. From complaint filing and evidence submission to case initiation, investigation, and penalties, it provides rights holders with a clearer and more efficient administrative pathway. Specifically: 

• Standardized Requirements for Evidence Submission. Article 18 introduces structured requirements for "preliminary evidence materials,” requiring proof regarding the formation process, non-public nature, commercial value, and confidentiality measures. It also enumerates typical scenarios that may serve as infringement clues. This improves predictability for businesses and efficiency for regulators.
• Clear Division of Jurisdiction and Case Filing Standards. In Article 3, jurisdictional rules are clarified: trade secret cases are organized and guided by the SAMR, with jurisdiction assigned to departments at the county or higher level. Technical secret cases are generally handled at the prefectural level, or by county-level departments authorized by SAMR to ensure greater expertise.
• Strengthened Investigative Authority and Enforcement Safeguards. Article 23 grants AMR investigative powers, including onsite inspections, interviews, document review and duplication, seizure of relevant assets, and bank account inquiries, while simultaneously establishing approval procedures. Meanwhile, authorities are bound by strict confidentiality obligations during enforcement proceedings ruled in Article 21.

4. Streamlined Penalty and Procedural Framework

Building upon the comprehensive protection framework, the Regulation further refines the liability rules, aiming at enhancing the deterrent effect against infringement. Articles 24 and 25 explicitly set out penalties such as the cessation of unlawful conduct, confiscation of illegal gains, and fines ranging from RMB 100,000 to RMB 1,000,000. Article 26 provides detailed criteria for determining "serious circumstances," with fines of up to RMB 5,000,000. Article 29 extends the regulatory scope to include cross-border infringement that causes harm to domestic rights holders, thereby reflecting the outward extension and upgraded standards of trade secret protection. Through the layered structure of liability and clearly defined standards, the Regulation not only strengthens the severity of administrative penalties but also significantly enhances the deterrent effect and practical efficacy of the protection system.

Compared with the Draft for public comment, the final Regulation is more concise and systematized. It strengthens administrative procedures, clarifies subject scope and jurisdiction, and introduces clear reporting mechanisms, confidentiality obligations, and criminal case transfer rules. Certain rigid elements in the draft—such as specific loss calculation formulas and standalone provisions on software-related infringement—have been removed to allow greater flexibility in practice. The scope of protected information has also been streamlined, and the overall legislative structure refined to enhance consistency and applicability.

Why This Matters

The new Regulation represents a comprehensive upgrade of China’s administrative trade secret protection system and signals a more mature and systematized approach to intellectual property governance and fair competition. For businesses operating in China, trade secrets are increasingly central to competitive advantage—whether in R&D, customer data, supply chains, or strategic operations. Under the new framework, companies benefit from clearer legal standards and stronger administrative enforcement tools, enabling more effective responses to misappropriation.

In a landscape of rapid technological advancement and intensifying global competition, a predictable and enforceable trade secret protection system is not merely a legal safeguard—it is a cornerstone of innovation confidence and long-term market stability.