- The State Administration for Market Regulation published Order No. 130 amending the implementation measures of the Fair Competition Review Regulation on 16 October 2026, with effect from 1 December 2026.
市场监管总局于 2026 年 10 月 16 日公布第 130 号令，修改《公平竞争审查条例实施办法》，自 2026 年 12 月 1 日起施行。
- Local performance requirements are now expressly prohibited, including local track record, years of establishment, local awards, a local branch, and local tax or social insurance payments used to grade an operator’s credit.
本地业绩要求被明确列入禁止情形，包括以本地业绩、成立年限、本地奖项荣誉、在本地设立分支机构、在本地缴纳税收社保来评价经营者信用等级。
- Differentiated credit scoring based on the origin of goods is banned where it affects out-of-town operators in Government Procurement and Bidding and Tendering.
以商品产地等因素设置差异化信用评分标准、影响外地经营者参加本地政府采购与招标投标的，同样被禁止。
- Unreasonably short publicity or response periods, and on-site-only registration or purchase of tender documents, are listed as prohibited practices.
设置不合理的公示时间或响应时间、仅允许现场报名或现场购买采购文件招标文件的，被列为禁止情形。
- Where a drafting body commissions government procurement, tendering or investment promotion, the drafting body itself must carry out the fair competition review.
起草单位委托实施政府采购、招标投标、招商引资的，由起草单位自己对相应政策措施开展公平竞争审查。
- Repeated procedural failures may draw a reminder from the market regulator, a supervisory prompt rather than a sanction.
多次出现审查不到位情形的，市场监管部门可以提醒督促，这是督促而非处罚。
- The amendment is published but not yet in force, so it binds measures drafted after 1 December 2026 rather than curing rules already issued.
该修改决定已公布但尚未施行，约束的是 2026 年 12 月 1 日之后起草的政策措施，并不溯及已经发布的文件。
Fair Competition Review: China Bans Local Performance Requirements in Procurement and Bidding | 公平竞争审查：把”本地业绩”写进禁止清单
Overview
On 16 October 2026 the State Administration for Market Regulation published Order No. 130, amending the implementation measures of the Fair Competition Review Regulation. It takes effect on 1 December 2026.
Fair competition review is the procedure by which a government body checks, before issuing a policy, whether it restricts competition. Most of what it covers — subsidy rules, local standards, licensing conditions — never reaches a foreign investor’s desk. This amendment matters because it writes into a binding rule the devices local authorities have used to keep outside firms out of public purchasing — and a foreign-invested company bidding for a public contract is, in this context, precisely an out-of-town operator.
Status: published, not yet in force
Two dates must not be merged: publication on 16 October 2026, application from 1 December 2026, existing measures in force until then.
The consequence is a drafting window. Measures already issued are not automatically rewritten; the amendment bites on measures drafted, reviewed or submitted after it takes effect, and on reviews still open. A grievance about a tender rule issued last year is not reopened by this order.
What the amendment changes
Credit scoring. Article 15(4) is rewritten. Using an operator’s local track record, years of establishment, awards obtained locally, a local branch, or local tax and social insurance payments to evaluate its credit rating is prohibited where this affects out-of-town operators’ participation in local government procurement or bidding. Differentiated scoring set by reference to factors such as the origin of goods is prohibited on the same item.
Access to the process. Article 15(6) prohibits unreasonably short publicity or response periods, and registration or document purchase available only on site.
Outsourced processes. A new Article 48 provides that where a drafting body commissions the implementation of government procurement, bidding and tendering, or investment promotion, that drafting body carries out the review of the corresponding measures. Outsourcing the process does not outsource the review.
The review procedure. Article 31 gains a fifth paragraph: where a drafting body repeatedly reviews poorly, fails to consult as required or submits incomplete materials, the regulator may remind and urge it to perform its duty. Article 33 gains two paragraphs: a measure found not to meet the standards must be revised per the review opinion and resubmitted, and a measure sent to the government must carry the compliant review conclusion. Article 35 requires third-party assessment results, and how far they were adopted, to be stated in the conclusion.
Consequential items. Article 25(1)(4) becomes “other circumstances provided for by laws and administrative regulations”; Article 37 requires the regulator to handle a report promptly or transfer it; Article 47 corrects a term for grassroots self-governing bodies.
Why local scoring was the target
A credit score is a threshold that does not look like one. Every bidder is measured the same way, so the rule reads as neutral. But a supplier with no local branch, no local tax record and no local awards starts below the line before its price is opened. The exclusion is produced by the scoring table, not by a sentence saying outsiders need not apply.
Naming these devices in a binding rule moves the argument to the drafting stage. A policy office that wants a local performance score must now write it down and defend it in review, rather than treat it as ordinary practice — a smaller step than an outright ban, and a more durable one.
What it means for foreign investors and M&A
First, qualification clauses requiring a local branch, a local tax registration or a fixed number of years of local operation become reviewable defects rather than commercial preferences. They will not vanish on 1 December; they become citable.
Second, in acquisition projects, the localised conditions that sometimes attach to a project face a narrower space. The amendment regulates the policy documents around a transaction, not the transaction — which shifts diligence toward the local measures the target’s business depends on.
Third, the review duty follows the commissioning body: where an authority runs procurement through an intermediary, the obligation stays with the authority.
What it does not do
It creates no private right of action; the route is a report to the market regulator, which must handle it promptly or pass it on. It does not touch merger control, a separate track under the Anti-Monopoly Law. And it does not turn a reminder into a penalty: Article 31(5) is a supervisory prompt, and reading it as a fine misstates the text.
Practical steps
- Search your tender documents for local branch, local tax record, local awards and years of local operation.
- Read the scoring table, not only the qualification section; local performance usually appears as points.
- Log each timetable: publicity period, question deadline, document purchase window.
- Keep the evidence when a clause looks exclusionary — the document, the scoring table, the timeline, your submission.
- Route a complaint to the regulator at the level that drafted the measure, citing Article 15(4) or 15(6).
Outlook
The new text will be applied in individual reviews, where the interpretive work will happen. For investors the value is specificity: a clause requiring three years of local experience is now a named defect.
Sources
- 市场监管总局·《关于修改〈公平竞争审查条例实施办法〉的决定》（总局令第 130 号）：https://www.samr.gov.cn/zw/zfxxgk/fdzdgknr/fgs/art/2026/art_cca9cd5968f0479ab82e7980fbe51571.html
- 市场监管总局·实施办法条文：https://www.samr.gov.cn/zw/zfxxgk/fdzdgknr/fgs/art/2026/art_d1f14a9d18ec42f0abc671d1034e2c35.html
- 中国政府网·《公平竞争审查条例》（国务院行政法规）：https://www.gov.cn/
- 市场监管总局·总局令与规范性文件发布：https://www.samr.gov.cn/
公平竞争审查：把”本地业绩”写进禁止清单
概述
2026 年 10 月 16 日，市场监管总局公布第 130 号令，修改《公平竞争审查条例实施办法》，自 2026 年 12 月 1 日起施行。
公平竞争审查是政府机关在出台政策之前，先自查这项政策是否限制竞争的程序。它管的大多数内容并不会摆到外资企业桌上：补贴规则、地方标准、许可条件。这份修改决定之所以值得看，是因为它把地方政府用来把外地企业挡在公共采购之外的那些具体手法，写进了一部有约束力的规章；而一家参与政府采购投标的外资企业，在这个语境里恰恰就是”外地经营者”。
状态：已公布，尚未施行
两个日期不能合并：10 月 16 日公布，12 月 1 日施行，在此之前现行办法继续有效。
由此产生的是一个起草窗口。已经发布的政策措施不会被自动改写；修改决定约束的是施行之后起草、审查或报送的政策措施，以及届时仍在进行的审查。手里握着一份去年招标文件的企业，不要把这份令当成重启旧案的工具。
修改了什么
信用评分。 第十五条第四项被改写。将经营者在本地的业绩、成立年限、所获得的奖项荣誉，或者在本地设立分支机构、缴纳税收社保等用于评价经营者信用等级，影响外地经营者参加本地政府采购、招标投标的，属于禁止情形。同一项还禁止根据商品产地等因素设置差异化信用评分标准。
参与程序的机会。 第十五条第六项禁止设置不合理的公示时间或者响应时间，以及仅允许现场报名、现场购买采购文件招标文件的做法。
委托出去的事。 新增第四十八条：起草单位委托实施政府采购、招标投标、招商引资的，由起草单位对相应政策措施开展公平竞争审查。把流程委托出去，不等于把审查责任委托出去。
审查程序本身。 第三十一条增加一款作为第五款：起草单位多次出现审查不到位、未按条例要求征求意见、提请审查时材料不完备等情况的，市场监管部门可以提醒督促其认真履行审查责任。第三十三条增加两款：审查结论认为不符合标准的，起草单位应按审查意见修改并重新提请审查；提请本级政府审议或审批时，应一并报送符合审查标准的审查结论。第三十五条要求引入第三方评估的，在审查结论或初审意见中说明评估结果及采纳情况。
配套与文字调整。 第二十五条第一款第四项改为”法律、行政法规规定的其他情形”；第三十七条明确接到举报后应及时处理或转送有关部门；第四十七条对基层群众性自治组织的表述作了修正。
为什么盯上的是本地评分
信用评分是一道不像门槛的门槛。所有投标人用同一把尺子量，规则读起来是中立的。但一家没有本地分支机构、没有本地纳税记录、没有本地奖项的供应商，在报价被拆封之前就已经排在分数线以下。排除效果由评分表产生，而不是由某句”外地企业不得参与”产生。
把这些手法写进有约束力的规章，等于把争论挪到文件被写出来的起草环节。想要保留本地业绩加分的政策部门，现在必须把它写下来、在审查中说明理由，而不能当作惯例带过——这比直接禁止这种做法步子更小，却更耐久。
对外资与并购意味着什么
第一，要求本地分支机构、本地税务登记或固定本地经营年限的资格条款，从”商务偏好”变成了”可指出的审查瑕疵”。它们不会在 12 月 1 日消失，但从此可以被点名。
第二，在并购项目中，有时附着于项目的本地化条件可操作空间被压缩。这份修改决定规范的是交易周边的政策文件，不是交易本身——尽职调查的重点因此转向标的业务依赖哪些地方性措施。
第三，审查责任跟着委托方走：地方机关通过中介机构实施采购的，义务仍留在机关身上。
它不做什么
它没有创设私人诉权，投诉的通道是向市场监管部门举报，接到举报后应及时处理或转送。它不涉及经营者集中，集中申报是反垄断法下另一条线。它也没有把”提醒督促”变成处罚：第三十一条第五款是督促，不是罚款。
落地步骤
- 把手头参与过的招标文件梳理一遍，检索本地分支机构、本地纳税记录、本地奖项、本地经营年限这几类表述。
- 读评分表，而不只是资格条件部分；本地业绩通常以分值而非门槛的形式出现。
- 记录每个项目的时间表：公示期、提问截止、文件购买窗口。
- 遇到疑似歧视性条款，把证据留全——招标文件、评分表、时间安排，以及自己的投标材料。
- 向起草该政策措施那一级的市场监管部门举报，直接引用第十五条第四项或第六项，而不是泛泛谈公平。
展望
新条文要在一个个具体审查里落地，解释工作会发生在个案中，而不是在指引里。对投资者而言，价值在于具体：要求”本地三年经验”的条款现在是一项有名目的瑕疵。
来源
- 市场监管总局·《关于修改〈公平竞争审查条例实施办法〉的决定》（总局令第 130 号）：https://www.samr.gov.cn/zw/zfxxgk/fdzdgknr/fgs/art/2026/art_cca9cd5968f0479ab82e7980fbe51571.html
- 市场监管总局·实施办法条文：https://www.samr.gov.cn/zw/zfxxgk/fdzdgknr/fgs/art/2026/art_d1f14a9d18ec42f0abc671d1034e2c35.html
- 中国政府网·《公平竞争审查条例》（国务院行政法规）：https://www.gov.cn/
- 市场监管总局·总局令与规范性文件发布：https://www.samr.gov.cn/