China Antitrust: Beijing Issues Municipal General Requirements for Fair Competition Review
Published 11 June 2026
Yu Du
On 27 May 2026, the Beijing Municipal Administration for Market Regulation released 48 Beijing local standards. Among those attracting broad attention is the General Requirements for Fair Competition Review (DB11/T 2522-2026), which will come into effect on 1 September 2026.
The new Beijing local standard is intended to make the review process more structured and practical. It reflects the requirements of China’s Anti-Monopoly Law, the Fair Competition Review Regulations, and the implementing rules, while translating those requirements into a municipal-level working standard for Beijing authorities and other organisations authorised by law to manage public affairs. The main contents of the standard are summarised below.
Key Features of the Standard
1. Broad Scope of Application
The standard applies to administrative authorities and legally authorised organisations when they draft local regulations, rules, normative documents, and other policy measures involving the economic activities of business operators.
Its coverage is broad. It includes policies relating to market access, industrial development, investment incentives, government procurement, tendering and bidding, qualification requirements, and regulatory enforcement. The review is therefore not limited to formal legislation, but also covers policy documents, technical standards, administrative agreements, memoranda, and other measures that may affect market competition.
2. Review Responsibility
The standard follows the principle of “whoever drafts, reviews”. Where a policy is drafted by one department, that department conducts the fair competition review. For jointly issued policies, the lead drafting department is responsible.
For policies to be issued by a district-level or higher people’s government, or submitted to the people’s congress at the same level, the market regulation authority will conduct the review together with the drafting entity. The drafting entity must first complete a preliminary review before submitting the draft and its opinion for further review.
3. Main Review Standards
The standard identifies four main areas of concern.
First, policies must not unlawfully restrict market access or exit, such as by creating approval procedures outside the market access negative list, granting exclusive rights without legal basis, or imposing unreasonable or discriminatory entry conditions.
Second, policies must not restrict the free movement of goods and production factors. This includes blocking non-local or imported goods, excluding non-local businesses from procurement or bidding, or applying discriminatory fees, subsidies, qualification standards, or regulatory requirements.
Third, policies must not improperly affect production and operating costs. Without a legal basis or State Council approval, authorities should not grant selected businesses tax preferences, fiscal rewards, subsidies, preferential access to factors of production, or reductions in administrative fees and other charges.
Fourth, policies must not interfere with business conduct in a way that distorts competition. They should not force or facilitate monopolistic conduct, exceed statutory pricing authority, give preferential prices to selected operators, or interfere with market-regulated prices.
4. Limited Exceptions
The standard allows limited exceptions where a policy may restrict competition but serves recognised public interests, such as national security, technological progress, independent innovation, energy conservation, environmental protection, or disaster relief.
However, the exception must be justified. The drafting entity must show that there is no less competition-restrictive alternative and that the policy has a reasonable implementation period or termination condition.
5. Review Procedure and Consultation
The review process consists of identifying whether the policy falls within the review scope, assessing it against the review standards, considering whether any exception applies, consulting relevant parties, and issuing a written conclusion.
Consultation is an important part of the process. Drafting entities should hear views from affected business operators, upstream and downstream businesses, industry associations, chambers of commerce, and, where public interests are involved, the general public. For public consultation, draft policies should be published through official government websites or other accessible channels.
The standard also makes clear that if a policy is issued without a written fair competition review conclusion, it will be deemed not to have undergone fair competition review.
6. Joint Review and Third-Party Assessment
For certain important policies, such as measures to be issued or forwarded by municipal or district governments, or draft local regulations submitted to the people’s congress, a joint review procedure is required.
The market regulation authority may provide review comments directly, seek expert or professional advice, organise a special meeting, or introduce a third-party assessment. Third-party assessment may be conducted by qualified institutions such as universities, research institutes, consulting firms, law firms, or other professional organisations with no conflict of interest.
Third-party assessment is particularly relevant where the drafting entity seeks to rely on an exception, or where a policy has been repeatedly challenged or reported for suspected violation of fair competition review standards.
7. Ongoing Evaluation, Clean-up and Supervision
The standard also extends beyond pre-issuance review. After a policy is issued, the drafting entity should periodically assess whether it affects the unified market or fair competition. If a policy is found to restrict competition, it should be amended or repealed.
Existing policies must also be reviewed and cleaned up on a regular or ad hoc basis. Where problems are identified through complaints, self-inspection, supervision, spot checks, assessment, or investigation, the drafting entity must take corrective action.
The standard further requires proper record-keeping. Review forms, consultation records, drafting explanations, issued policy documents, joint review materials, and related documents should be archived. Drafting entities are also expected to strengthen internal review capacity and accept public supervision.
Comment
The release of this Beijing local standard is significant because it makes fair competition review more operational at the municipal level. The standard gives drafting authorities a clearer workflow, a written review form, consultation requirements, joint review procedures, third-party assessment options, complaint-handling rules, and archiving obligations. This helps reduce uncertainty in how fair competition review should be carried out in practice.
For businesses, the standard may provide a more concrete basis to assess whether a local policy is potentially discriminatory or competition-restrictive. Companies facing market entry barriers, unequal procurement conditions, selective subsidies, local protectionism, or discriminatory regulatory requirements may be able to refer to the review standards and complaint-handling mechanism when raising concerns.
The new Beijing local standard is intended to make the review process more structured and practical. It reflects the requirements of China’s Anti-Monopoly Law, the Fair Competition Review Regulations, and the implementing rules, while translating those requirements into a municipal-level working standard for Beijing authorities and other organisations authorised by law to manage public affairs. The main contents of the standard are summarised below.
Key Features of the Standard
1. Broad Scope of Application
The standard applies to administrative authorities and legally authorised organisations when they draft local regulations, rules, normative documents, and other policy measures involving the economic activities of business operators.
Its coverage is broad. It includes policies relating to market access, industrial development, investment incentives, government procurement, tendering and bidding, qualification requirements, and regulatory enforcement. The review is therefore not limited to formal legislation, but also covers policy documents, technical standards, administrative agreements, memoranda, and other measures that may affect market competition.
2. Review Responsibility
The standard follows the principle of “whoever drafts, reviews”. Where a policy is drafted by one department, that department conducts the fair competition review. For jointly issued policies, the lead drafting department is responsible.
For policies to be issued by a district-level or higher people’s government, or submitted to the people’s congress at the same level, the market regulation authority will conduct the review together with the drafting entity. The drafting entity must first complete a preliminary review before submitting the draft and its opinion for further review.
3. Main Review Standards
The standard identifies four main areas of concern.
First, policies must not unlawfully restrict market access or exit, such as by creating approval procedures outside the market access negative list, granting exclusive rights without legal basis, or imposing unreasonable or discriminatory entry conditions.
Second, policies must not restrict the free movement of goods and production factors. This includes blocking non-local or imported goods, excluding non-local businesses from procurement or bidding, or applying discriminatory fees, subsidies, qualification standards, or regulatory requirements.
Third, policies must not improperly affect production and operating costs. Without a legal basis or State Council approval, authorities should not grant selected businesses tax preferences, fiscal rewards, subsidies, preferential access to factors of production, or reductions in administrative fees and other charges.
Fourth, policies must not interfere with business conduct in a way that distorts competition. They should not force or facilitate monopolistic conduct, exceed statutory pricing authority, give preferential prices to selected operators, or interfere with market-regulated prices.
4. Limited Exceptions
The standard allows limited exceptions where a policy may restrict competition but serves recognised public interests, such as national security, technological progress, independent innovation, energy conservation, environmental protection, or disaster relief.
However, the exception must be justified. The drafting entity must show that there is no less competition-restrictive alternative and that the policy has a reasonable implementation period or termination condition.
5. Review Procedure and Consultation
The review process consists of identifying whether the policy falls within the review scope, assessing it against the review standards, considering whether any exception applies, consulting relevant parties, and issuing a written conclusion.
Consultation is an important part of the process. Drafting entities should hear views from affected business operators, upstream and downstream businesses, industry associations, chambers of commerce, and, where public interests are involved, the general public. For public consultation, draft policies should be published through official government websites or other accessible channels.
The standard also makes clear that if a policy is issued without a written fair competition review conclusion, it will be deemed not to have undergone fair competition review.
6. Joint Review and Third-Party Assessment
For certain important policies, such as measures to be issued or forwarded by municipal or district governments, or draft local regulations submitted to the people’s congress, a joint review procedure is required.
The market regulation authority may provide review comments directly, seek expert or professional advice, organise a special meeting, or introduce a third-party assessment. Third-party assessment may be conducted by qualified institutions such as universities, research institutes, consulting firms, law firms, or other professional organisations with no conflict of interest.
Third-party assessment is particularly relevant where the drafting entity seeks to rely on an exception, or where a policy has been repeatedly challenged or reported for suspected violation of fair competition review standards.
7. Ongoing Evaluation, Clean-up and Supervision
The standard also extends beyond pre-issuance review. After a policy is issued, the drafting entity should periodically assess whether it affects the unified market or fair competition. If a policy is found to restrict competition, it should be amended or repealed.
Existing policies must also be reviewed and cleaned up on a regular or ad hoc basis. Where problems are identified through complaints, self-inspection, supervision, spot checks, assessment, or investigation, the drafting entity must take corrective action.
The standard further requires proper record-keeping. Review forms, consultation records, drafting explanations, issued policy documents, joint review materials, and related documents should be archived. Drafting entities are also expected to strengthen internal review capacity and accept public supervision.
Comment
The release of this Beijing local standard is significant because it makes fair competition review more operational at the municipal level. The standard gives drafting authorities a clearer workflow, a written review form, consultation requirements, joint review procedures, third-party assessment options, complaint-handling rules, and archiving obligations. This helps reduce uncertainty in how fair competition review should be carried out in practice.
For businesses, the standard may provide a more concrete basis to assess whether a local policy is potentially discriminatory or competition-restrictive. Companies facing market entry barriers, unequal procurement conditions, selective subsidies, local protectionism, or discriminatory regulatory requirements may be able to refer to the review standards and complaint-handling mechanism when raising concerns.