China's Ministry of Justice Rules EU Subsidy Investigation Into JD.com Constitutes Improper Extraterritorial Jurisdiction
Nashnova编辑部
China's Ministry of Justice, jointly with the Ministry of Commerce, has formally ruled that the EU's cross-border investigation into JD.com under its Foreign Subsidies Regulation constitutes improper extraterritorial jurisdiction — meaning any Chinese entity that cooperates now risks breaking Chinese law.
What happened?
China's Ministry of Justice, together with the Ministry of Commerce and other agencies, issued a formal notice declaring that the EU's subsidy investigation into JD.com (京东) — specifically, its cross-border evidence-gathering from Chinese entities — constitutes improper extraterritorial jurisdiction.
The ruling invokes Articles 3 and 6 of the *PRC Anti-Foreign Improper Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Regulation*.
In plain terms = the EU wanted to examine how much Chinese government subsidy JD.com received, and reached into Chinese organizations to do so. Beijing has now officially said: that reach crossed the line.
What does this mean for Chinese companies?
The notice explicitly orders: no organization or individual may execute or assist in executing the EU's investigative measures. The ban takes effect immediately.
This means → any Chinese entity that cooperates with the EU probe now faces direct legal liability under Chinese law.
In plain terms = Chinese companies are caught in a legal pinch — cooperate with the EU, break Chinese law; refuse the EU, risk EU penalties. Both directions carry legal consequences.
How much does this constrain the EU?
The EU's Foreign Subsidies Regulation — FSR, a law designed to scrutinize whether foreign-government subsidies distort competition inside the EU single market — now faces a direct institutional barrier in China-related cases.
This reflects an escalating legal standoff between China and the EU over extraterritorial jurisdiction: the EU seeks to extend regulatory reach into Chinese subsidy flows, while China uses domestic legislation to cut the investigation chain at the source.
This means → if the EU wants to probe the subsidy background of Chinese firms in future, gathering evidence and securing cooperation inside China will be significantly harder.
Content is for reference only, not financial advice.