The foreign exchange bureau notified 24 cases of violations, and many enterprises and banks were named. – 爱上海419论坛,上海后花园论坛,阿拉爱上海龙凤1314

　　BEIJING, May 4 (Xinhua) The State Administration of Foreign Exchange reported cases of foreign exchange violations in official website on the 4th, including many enterprises and banks.

　　According to the circular, since 2018, the State Administration of Foreign Exchange has thoroughly implemented the spirit of the 19th National Congress of the Communist Party of China and the work arrangements of the CPC Central Committee and the State Council, closely focused on the three tasks of serving the real economy, preventing and controlling financial risks and deepening financial reform, strengthened the supervision of the foreign exchange market, severely investigated and dealt with all kinds of illegal foreign exchange outflows and inflows according to law, cracked down on false and deceptive transactions, maintained the stable operation of the foreign exchange market, and effectively fought a tough battle to prevent and resolve financial risks.

　　According to the Regulations of People’s Republic of China (PRC) Municipality on the Openness of Government Information (Order No.492nd of the State Council) and other relevant regulations, some typical cases of foreign exchange violations are hereby notified as follows:

　　Case 1: Tianjin Binhai Haitong Logistics Co., Ltd. evaded foreign exchange.

　　From January 2015 to January 2016, Tianjin Binhai Haitong Logistics Co., Ltd. made up the background of entrepot trade, and used the ocean bill of lading that other companies had taken delivery of, and paid foreign exchange of 46.518 million US dollars.

　　This behavior violates Articles 12 and 14 of the Regulations on Foreign Exchange Control, which constitutes a foreign exchange evasion, seriously disrupting the order of the foreign exchange market, with a huge amount and a bad nature. According to Article 39 of the Regulations on Foreign Exchange Control, a fine of RMB 11.05 million was imposed.

　　Case 2: Xilong Science Co., Ltd. evaded foreign exchange.

　　From January 2015 to December 2016, Xilong Science Co., Ltd., Shantou City, Guangdong Province, fabricated the background of entrepot trade, used invalid bills of lading, and paid foreign exchange of 17.6102 million US dollars.

　　This behavior violates Articles 12 and 14 of the Regulations on Foreign Exchange Control, which constitutes a foreign exchange evasion behavior, seriously disrupting the order of the foreign exchange market, and has a bad nature. According to Article 39 of the Regulations on Foreign Exchange Control, a fine of RMB 5.77 million was imposed.

　　Case 3: Chengdu Weiyi Trading Co., Ltd. evaded foreign exchange.

　　In June 2015, Chengdu Weiyi Trading Co., Ltd. made up the background of entrepot trade, used false bills of lading, and paid foreign exchange of 4,252,800 US dollars.

　　Case 4: Zhejiang Juxiong Import and Export Co., Ltd. evaded foreign exchange.

　　In February, 2016, Zhejiang Juxiong Import & Export Co., Ltd. made up the background of entrepot trade, and used the ocean bill of lading that had been picked up by other companies to pay foreign exchange of 5,247,600 US dollars.

　　Case 5: Guangxi Beitou Shenglong Import and Export Trading Co., Ltd. evaded foreign exchange.

　　From December 2016 to February 2017, Guangxi Beitou Shenglong Import & Export Trading Co., Ltd. fabricated the background of entrepot trade, used false bills of lading, and paid foreign exchange of 13.3822 million US dollars.

　　Case 6: Tianjin Haohua Minsheng Science and Technology Development Co., Ltd. Foreign exchange illegal remittance case

　　In June 2015, Tianjin Haohua Minsheng Science and Technology Development Co., Ltd. fabricated the export trade background and remitted 2 million US dollars in the name of "advance payment", which constituted illegal remittance of foreign exchange.

　　This behavior violates Articles 12 and 13 of the Regulations on Foreign Exchange Control. According to Article 41 of the Regulations on Foreign Exchange Control, a fine of RMB 200,000 was imposed.

　　Case 7: Lianyungang Yunong Agricultural Technology Co., Ltd. illegally settled foreign exchange.

　　From July to September, 2015, Jiangsu Lianyungang Yunong Agricultural Science and Technology Co., Ltd. constructed a false contract for capital remittance and settlement of US$ 4.89 million.

　　This act violates Article 23 of the Regulations on Foreign Exchange Control and Article 9 of the Regulations on Foreign Direct Investment in China by Foreign Investors, and constitutes an illegal settlement of foreign exchange. According to Article 41 of the Regulations on Foreign Exchange Control, a fine of RMB 980,000 was imposed.

　　Case 8: Rugao Chengyang Agricultural Technology Co., Ltd. illegally settled foreign exchange.

　　On June 28, 2016, Jiangsu Rugao Chengyang Agricultural Science and Technology Co., Ltd. constructed a false contract to handle capital remittance and foreign exchange settlement of 2.8 million US dollars.

　　Case 9: Xuzhou Haisheng Electronics Co., Ltd. illegally settled foreign exchange.

　　In December 2016, Xuzhou Haisheng Electronics Co., Ltd. remitted 9,999,900 US dollars of capital for fictitious capital use. After settlement, it was used by individuals for other purposes, but it was not used for the normal production and business activities of the company, which constituted illegal settlement of foreign exchange.

　　This behavior violates Article 23 of the Regulations on Foreign Exchange Control. According to Article 41 of the Regulations on Foreign Exchange Control, a fine of RMB 1.234 million was imposed.

　　Case 10: Nantong Tongzhou Shuoqing Machinery Co., Ltd. illegally settled foreign exchange.

　　From March to April, 2017, Jiangsu Nantong Tongzhou Shuoqing Machinery Co., Ltd. constructed a false contract to handle capital remittance and settlement of 8 million US dollars.

　　This act violates Article 23 of the Regulations on the Administration of Foreign Exchange and Article 9 of the Regulations on the Administration of Foreign Direct Investment in China by Foreign Investors, and constitutes an illegal settlement of foreign exchange. According to Article 41 of the Regulations on Foreign Exchange Control, a fine of RMB 1.1 million was imposed.

　　Case 11: Quanzhou Branch of China Merchants Bank illegally handled domestic insurance and foreign loans.

　　During the period from October 2013 to October 2015, Quanzhou Branch of China Merchants Bank failed to conduct due diligence review and investigation on the use of loan funds, the expected repayment source, the possibility of guarantee performance and related transaction background when handling the signing of domestic insurance loans and the purchase and payment of foreign exchange.

　　The above-mentioned behavior of the bank violates Articles 12 and 28 of the Regulations on the Administration of Cross-border Guaranteed Foreign Exchange. According to Article 47 of the Regulations on Foreign Exchange Control, it was ordered to make corrections within a time limit, with the illegal income of 2,131,900 yuan confiscated and a fine of 5.8 million yuan.

　　Case 12: China Industrial and Commercial Bank Tianjin Economic and Technological Development Zone Branch illegally handled the case of domestic insurance and foreign loans.

　　During the period from December 2013 to January 2016, Tianjin Economic and Technological Development Zone Branch of China Industrial and Commercial Bank failed to conduct due diligence review and investigation on the use of funds under the guarantee, the use of funds and related transaction background in accordance with the provisions, in the case of obvious problems such as the contents of the loan use message could not be recognized, the letter of intent for extension did not reflect the use of funds under the guarantee, and the performance amount was greater than the loan amount.

　　The above-mentioned behavior of the bank violates Articles 12 and 28 of the Regulations on the Administration of Cross-border Guaranteed Foreign Exchange. According to Article 47 of the Regulations on Foreign Exchange Control, the illegal income of RMB 670,000 was confiscated and a fine of RMB 1.2 million was imposed.

　　Case 13: hana bank (China) Tianjin Branch illegally handled the case of domestic insurance and foreign loans.

　　During the period from August 2014 to August 2016, hana bank (China) Tianjin Branch failed to conduct due diligence review and investigation on the debtor’s subject qualification, the transfer of goods rights in the transaction process and the related transaction background when signing the domestic insurance loan and performing the purchase and payment of foreign exchange.

　　The above-mentioned behavior of the bank violates Articles 12 and 28 of the Regulations on the Administration of Cross-border Guaranteed Foreign Exchange. According to Article 47 of the Regulations on Foreign Exchange Control, the illegal income of RMB 366,000 was confiscated, and a fine of RMB 2 million was imposed, and the business of public settlement and sale of foreign exchange was suspended for three months.

　　Case 14: Minsheng Bank Taiyuan Branch illegally handled the case of internal insurance and external loan.

　　During the period from September 2014 to August 2015, Taiyuan Branch of Minsheng Bank failed to conduct due diligence review and investigation on the source of the debtor’s repayment funds when signing the contract for domestic insurance and foreign loans and performing the purchase and payment of foreign exchange.

　　The above-mentioned behavior of the bank violates Articles 12 and 28 of the Regulations on the Administration of Cross-border Guaranteed Foreign Exchange. According to Article 47 of the Regulations on Foreign Exchange Control, it was ordered to make corrections within a time limit, confiscate the illegal income of 2.07 million yuan and impose a fine of 1.6 million yuan.

　　Case 15: Xinxiang Branch of Agricultural Bank of China illegally handled the case of internal insurance and external loan.

　　In December, 2016, Xinxiang Branch of Agricultural Bank of China failed to conduct due diligence review and investigation on the use of funds under the guarantee and related transaction background, nor did it continuously supervise and track the use of loan funds.

　　The above-mentioned behavior of the bank violates Articles 12 and 28 of the Regulations on the Administration of Cross-border Guaranteed Foreign Exchange. According to Article 47 of the Regulations on Foreign Exchange Control, it was ordered to make corrections within a time limit, with the illegal income of 472,100 yuan confiscated and a fine of 1 million yuan.

　　Case 16: Harbin Bank Shenyang Branch illegally handled the settlement of advance payment.

　　From May 2015 to July 2015, Shenyang Branch of Harbin Bank failed to conduct due diligence review on export contracts, invoices and other documents of enterprises and the consistency of their foreign exchange receipts and payments, and illegally handled the settlement of foreign exchange in advance of goods trade.

　　The above-mentioned behavior of the bank violates Article 12 of the Regulations on Foreign Exchange Control. According to Article 47 of the Regulations on Foreign Exchange Control, it was ordered to make corrections within a time limit and fined 400,000 yuan.

　　Case 17: Jiangmen Branch of China Merchants Bank illegally handled the case of personal trade foreign exchange collection.

　　From November 2015 to May 2017, Jiangmen Branch of China Merchants Bank illegally handled cross-border trade payment collection business through personal foreign exchange savings account.

　　The above-mentioned behavior of the bank violates Article 32 of the Measures for the Administration of Personal Foreign Exchange. According to Article 48 of the Regulations on Foreign Exchange Control, it was ordered to make corrections within a time limit and fined 160,000 yuan.

　　Case 18: Tai ‘an Branch of China Construction Bank illegally handled the case of foreign debt settlement.

　　From February to May, 2016, China Construction Bank Tai ‘an Branch failed to review and retain the contracts and invoices related to the use of foreign exchange settlement funds of enterprises as required, and illegally handled the foreign exchange settlement business for enterprises without reviewing whether the use of foreign exchange settlement funds of enterprises was consistent with the contract.

　　The above-mentioned behavior of the bank violates the relevant provisions in Article 15 of the Measures for the Administration of Foreign Debt Registration and Chapter 6 of the Operational Guidelines for the Administration of Foreign Debt Registration, namely "Bank Audit Materials" and "Audit Elements". According to Article 47 of the Regulations on Foreign Exchange Control, a fine of RMB 400,000 was imposed.

　　Case 19: Industrial and Commercial Bank of China Binzhou Xincheng Sub-branch illegally handled the case of goods trade settlement.

　　From February to December, 2016, Binzhou Xincheng Sub-branch of Industrial and Commercial Bank of China failed to review the background of the change of foreign exchange collection methods and the necessity of foreign currency cash collection, and illegally handled the foreign currency cash collection and settlement business of goods trade.

　　The above-mentioned behavior of the bank violates Articles 6, 9 and 10 of the Measures for the Administration of Receipt and Payment of Foreign Currency Cash by Domestic Institutions. According to Article 47 of the Regulations on Foreign Exchange Control, a fine of RMB 300,000 was imposed.

　　Case 20: Ningbo Branch of Ping An Bank illegally handled entrepot trade.

　　From June to December, 2016, Ping An Bank Ningbo Branch failed to examine the authenticity of entrepot trade due diligence as required, and illegally handled the entrepot trade foreign exchange payment business when the entrepot trade transaction documents submitted by the enterprise had no delivery effect.

　　Case 21: Zhang, a native of Shanghai, split up and evaded foreign exchange.

　　In 2016, in order to realize the purpose of illegally transferring assets abroad, Zhang used his personal annual foreign exchange purchase quota of 27 people and others to split his personal funds and remit them to overseas accounts. The total amount of illegally transferred funds was $1,341,900.

　　This behavior violates Article 7 of the Measures for the Administration of Personal Foreign Exchange and constitutes a foreign exchange evasion. According to Article 39 of the Regulations on Foreign Exchange Control, a fine of RMB 460,000 was imposed.

　　Case 22: Chen Mou, a native of Shaanxi Province, illegally bought and sold foreign exchange.

　　From August to September, 2016, for the purpose of illegally transferring assets abroad, Chen Mou transferred RMB 26 million into a domestic account controlled by an underground bank, and remitted foreign exchange to its Hong Kong account through the underground bank, with a total amount of US$ 3,890,600.

　　This behavior violates Article 30 of the Measures for the Administration of Personal Foreign Exchange, and constitutes an illegal act of buying and selling foreign exchange. According to Article 45 of the Regulations on Foreign Exchange Control, a fine of RMB 1.69 million was imposed.

　　Case 23: Tangmou, a Jiangxi native, split up and escaped from foreign exchange.

　　From January to October, 2016, in order to realize the illegal transfer of assets abroad, Tang used his personal annual foreign exchange purchase quota of 69 people and others to split his personal funds and remit them to multiple overseas accounts. The total amount of illegally transferred funds was 3.211 million US dollars.

　　Case 24: Jiangsu Tu’s case of splitting and escaping from foreign exchange.

　　From January 2016 to April 2017, for the purpose of illegally transferring assets abroad, Tu used the personal annual foreign exchange purchase quota of 43 domestic individuals to split up personal funds and remit them to overseas accounts. The total amount of illegally transferred funds was 2.1238 million US dollars.