Against the backdrop of China's deepening social credit system construction, credit has emerged as a fundamental cornerstone of market economy operations. In practice, certain market entities engage in discredited behaviors characterized by "having the capacity to perform yet refusing to fulfill obligations determined by effective legal instruments" (commonly referred to as "laolai"), severely undermining market order and the social credit environment. To regulate the governance of such conduct, the Supreme People's Court issued the "Provisions on Publishing Information of Discredited Persons Subject to Enforcement" (Fa Shi [2013] No. 17) on July 16, 2013, which took effect on October 1 of the same year. This marked the inception of the systematic construction of China's discredited person subject to enforcement framework.

  It is crucial to distinguish between a "person subject to enforcement" (被执行人) and a "discredited person subject to enforcement" (失信被执行人):

A person subject to enforcement refers to a party who refuses to comply with court judgments or arbitration awards after the statutory appeal period has expired or after a final judgment has been rendered. When a defendant fails to fulfill the compensation amount stipulated in the judgment within the statutory timeframe following a plaintiff's victory in a civil lawsuit, and the court initiates compulsory enforcement, the defendant is designated as the person subject to enforcement for that specific compulsory enforcement action.

  In contrast, the official definition specifies:

A discredited person subject to enforcement refers to a person subject to enforcement who possesses the capacity to perform yet fails to fulfill obligations determined by an effective legal instrument, and falls under any of the following circumstances, thereby warranting inclusion in the list of discredited persons subject to enforcement:
(1) Obstructing or resisting enforcement through means such as fabricating evidence, violence, or threats;
(2) Evading enforcement through fraudulent litigation, fraudulent arbitration, concealment, or transfer of property;
(3) Violating the property reporting system;
(4) Violating orders restricting high-consumption activities;
(5) Refusing without justifiable reason to perform an enforcement settlement agreement;
(6) Other circumstances involving the capacity to perform yet refusal to fulfill obligations determined by an effective legal instrument.

  The data on discredited persons subject to enforcement compiled by CnOpenData, based on the aforementioned framework, systematically reflects the distribution characteristics, behavioral patterns, and evolutionary trends of this group in China. It constitutes a vital foundational data resource for research on social credit governance, judicial enforcement efficiency, and market credit risk.

---

Time Coverage

By Announcement Date: 2013 - 2025.08.20

---

Field Display

---

Sample Data

Discredited Persons Subject to Enforcement (Legal Entities)

Discredited Persons Subject to Enforcement (Natural Persons)

---

Relevant Literature

• Yu Yongze, Guo Menghua, Hu Shan, 2020: "Social Environment of Dishonesty and the Growth of Private Enterprises: Empirical Evidence from Urban Dishonest Persons," China Industrial Economics, No. 9.
• Dai Yiyi, Zhang Pengdong, Pan Yue, 2019: "More Laolai, More Difficult Loans? Evidence from Regional Integrity Levels and Bank Loans of Listed Companies," Finance Research, No. 8.
• Yang Guochao, Pan Yuzhang, 2019: "Is Trust Priced? Evidence from the Bond Market," Finance Research, No. 1.

---

Data Update Frequency

Annual Updates