China’s counter-sanctions rules: what actually changes for an importer

What China has actually built

Six instruments, assembled over six years. They are usually described as a response to US sanctions — true, and unhelpfully abstract. What matters to a buyer is which of them can attach to an ordinary commercial decision.

Both 2026 decrees took effect on the day they were published — no transition period, no implementing guidance. That is why the first months have to be read from enforcement rather than from the text.

What has actually been enforced

Five of those six are state-level: oil sanctions, an EU merger review, a subsidies probe. An importer of furniture or fasteners is not the target of any of them.

Three ordinary acts that now carry risk

Strip out the geopolitics and three routine things a buyer does have changed shape.

• Investigating a supply chain. Article 13 of Decree 834 addresses unlawful investigation and information-gathering on Chinese supply chains by foreign parties. No approval route has been published and no enforcement of that article has been reported. The distinction that matters is between information a supplier discloses about itself under an agreed contract term and information a foreign party goes and collects. The first is ordinary trade. See can I legally audit my Chinese supplier?
• Dropping a Chinese counterparty. The Unreliable Entity List has always been framed around cutting off normal transactions, and Decree 834 adds countermeasures where transactions with Chinese parties are interrupted. A commercially rational exit is unlikely to attract attention; one recorded in your own files as “terminated to comply with [foreign sanction]” is a different artefact.
• Writing the contract. AFSL Article 12 lets a Chinese party sue in a Chinese court over the implementation of foreign sanctions, and Chinese courts have taken such claims where the contract pointed elsewhere. Foreign law and offshore arbitration are still worth having — they are no longer a reliable answer to where a dispute will be heard.

Export licences, and the date that decides them

Here precision matters more than volume, because the widely reported extraterritorial rules are not currently operating.

10 November 2026 is the date to model. China’s suspension lapses that day; the US suspension of the BIS Affiliates Rule — the other half of the same bargain — reimposes on the same day absent further action; and the wider trade truce expires, as set out in the 7.5% overcapacity tariff. Ordinary consumer goods are unaffected. Anything containing magnets, batteries or specialty alloys deserves a note in the file now — and see how long a China export licence takes.

What is proportionate to do

Enforcement so far has been selective, and aimed at states and at large, symbolic targets. That is a reason for proportion rather than complacency: the instruments are drafted broadly enough that six actions do not define the boundary.

• Move data requests into the purchase contract. A disclosure clause sitting beside tolerances and packaging is a commercial term. The same questions issued as a standalone investigation questionnaire are not obviously the same act.
• Get written consent before anything happens on site, and keep it. A consented, documented visit is defensible in both directions — and it is the practical answer to an audit programme that has lost its usual provider.
• Check which audit and traceability providers your contracts commit you to, including through a customer’s standard terms. The 5 August listing bites on performance in China, not on the paper.
• Record termination decisions in commercial language — price, quality, capacity, concentration — because that is usually what they are. Where the reason genuinely is a sanctions designation, take counsel in both jurisdictions before the notice goes out.
• Know which legal entity actually manufactures your goods, and leave worker-level personal data out of the file entirely — it engages PIPL and no part of this exercise needs it. See is my supplier a factory or a trading company?

Do not expect your own government to resolve the conflict. The EU’s Anti-Coercion Instrument is a state-to-state remedy and has never been formally invoked; the US has no blocking statute at all. Where the two systems collide, the collision lands on the company.

Quick FAQ

Do these rules stop me importing from China?

No. Nothing in the AFSL, the Blocking Rules or Decrees 834 and 835 restricts ordinary buying. They govern three other things: investigating a Chinese supply chain, terminating a Chinese counterparty over a foreign sanction, and complying inside China with a measure Beijing has declared improper.

Is it illegal to audit a Chinese supplier now?

No, but the route matters. Article 13 of Decree 834 addresses unlawful investigation and information-gathering by foreign parties. Contractual disclosure and consented, documented visits sit on a different footing from an uninvited enquiry. The boundary is undefined in published guidance, which is a reason to stay well inside it. This is general information, not legal advice — take Chinese counsel before running a collection programme at scale.

My customer requires an RBA audit of the factory. What now?

Raise it with the customer rather than quietly substituting something. Since 5 August 2026 organisations in China are prohibited from transacting or cooperating with the listed entities, which affects delivery of those programmes inside China. It does not affect the underlying question — whether the plant is what it claims to be — which can still be evidenced directly. See can I still get an RBA audit of a Chinese factory?

Can a Chinese supplier sue me in China for cancelling an order?

For an ordinary commercial cancellation, this framework is not the risk — your contract is. AFSL Article 12 is directed at the implementation of foreign sanctions. The first reported claim ended in mediation in November 2024 after a vessel freeze; further claims filed in 2026 are pending, and none has produced a reported judgment.

Does any of this apply to a small importer?

The instruments apply generally, and Chinese officials have said they will be used prudently. The realistic exposure for a smaller buyer is indirect: an audit clause that cannot be performed, a rare-earth input that needs a licence, or a supplier file assembled in a way that would be awkward to explain. None of that needs a compliance department — only knowing which one applies to you.

What is the single thing worth doing this quarter?

Write two lists: the Chinese-origin inputs that touch the controlled categories, and the audit or traceability providers your contracts oblige you to use in China. They take an afternoon and cover most of the realistic exposure. Everything else here is context for them.