💾 Archived View for gmi.noulin.net › mobileNews › 5049.gmi captured on 2021-12-05 at 23:47:19. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content

View Raw

More Information

⬅️ Previous capture (2021-12-03)

➡️ Next capture (2023-01-29)

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Consumers in China - The true meaning of san yao wu

China s new consumer law has local and foreign firms worried

Mar 15th 2014 | SHANGHAI | From the print edition

FIFTY-TWO years ago this week, John Kennedy gave a speech to Congress in which

he argued that consumers are the only important group in the economy who are

not effectively organised, whose views are often not heard. His eloquent plea

for their protection led to the United Nations guidelines for consumer

protection and to the annual celebration of World Consumer-Rights Day on March

15th.

Nowhere is that day marked with more gusto than in China, where it is known as

san yao wu (three one five). Every year on that date, the national broadcaster

airs a much-watched programme lauding consumer rights. It is also used as an

excuse to bash successful foreign firms Apple was last year s main target for

small or imagined transgressions.

This year China will better honour Kennedy s legacy. The television gala is

still due to be broadcast this weekend, and corporate evildoers internet firms

are rumoured to be in the crosshairs this time will probably be shamed again.

But something more important will also happen. On March 15th a new consumer

law, the biggest reform in this area in 20 years, comes into force. At face

value, it appears to give a big boost to consumer protection. Retailers must

take back goods within seven days; in the case of online purchases, consumers

do not even have to offer a reason. Consumer data will be protected from

misuse, and permission will have to be sought for any commercial use of them.

Class-action lawsuits, hitherto rare in China, will become easier to file.

The motivations for the law seem sincere. The government is keen to shift the

economy towards consumption-driven growth. Regulations protecting consumers

should help, by bolstering their trust in merchants. Max Xin Gu of K&L Gates, a

legal firm, also believes the law is timed to come hand-in-hand with the

anti-corruption campaign launched by President Xi Jinping: both are meant to

allow ordinary people to benefit from the rule of law.

James Feldkamp is the founder of Mingjian, a pioneering Chinese website

offering independent product reviews (akin to America s Consumer Reports or

Britain s Which?). He agrees that trust and transparency are key to boosting

consumption. However, he worries about how the law will be implemented and

enforced. Indeed it may leave consumers ill-protected even as it saddles firms

with extra costs and complexity. For example, although parts of the law

resemble the EU s strict rules on data privacy, it has important gaps. Michael

Tan of Taylor Wessing, another law firm, notes that it does not grant a right

to be forgotten (by having firms expunge all record of a former customer). It

leaves businesses in the dark on how exactly they can use customer data, and

fails to impose on them a duty to ensure their accuracy.

Opening the door to class-action lawsuits may also prove a damp squib. In

America aggrieved consumers can club together and go to court themselves. In

China, points out Mr Tan, only government-controlled consumer associations will

be allowed to launch such suits: no ambulance-chasers here. It is hard to

imagine consumers persuading these official bodies to bring suits against state

firms.

Consumer businesses fear that besides falling short in protecting punters, the

law will tie them up in red tape. Publicly, local firms such as Alibaba, an

e-commerce giant, say they are ready. Privately, many are worried. An executive

at another big Chinese firm grumbles that it s a boatload of work and internal

co-ordination to hit compliance. Worse, the bureaucracy and the risk of

prosecution may deter entrepreneurs from starting firms to compete with

established ones; if so, the result will end up being bad for consumers.

China is catching up with the European Union s exacting standards of consumer

rights in much the same way as it has begun imposing EU-style curbs on cars

emissions. In both cases, pressure from ordinary Chinese prompted the

government to tighten standards. Besides benefiting the public, the pollution

measures give an edge to firms with the most advanced technology, which in this

case happen to be foreign multinationals.

As for the consumer law, Western firms, used to operating within strict

consumer-rights regimes back home, ought to cope better with it than domestic

ones. But the opposite may happen. Although on paper the law does not

discriminate between Chinese and non-Chinese businesses, a local lawyer worries

about sporadic and discretionary enforcement , in the same way that China s

antitrust laws have been applied strictly to foreign firms whereas local ones

have usually been spared.

When faced with angry customers, domestic firms often have flexible rules, and

can act fast to defuse crises even if it means quietly paying off undeserving

complainants. They also know people who scare people, says an expert on the

local business scene, which obviously helps silence troublemakers.

Multinationals, in contrast, tend to be bound by rules laid down in a distant

head office (which would certainly preclude sending in heavies). By the time

they have reacted to problems, unhappy customers may have taken to their weibo

microblogs or the news media to stir up trouble. Most foreign firms, concludes

Scott Thiel, a lawyer at DLA Piper, are just not ready for this law.