China has imposed what is believed to be the country’s largest-ever penalty for unauthorized patent agency practice, with an Anhui regulator ordering the Anhui branch of Beijing BoXTe Patent Agency (General Partnership) to pay a total of RMB 17.08 million (more than USD 2.5 million).
The Anhui Provincial Administration for Market Regulation issued the administrative penalty decision on August 10, 2026. The decision concerns the branch’s unauthorized conduct of patent agency business without the required practice license.
The total penalty and confiscation amount is RMB 17,081,860.09. The decision states that the branch generated illegal income of RMB 3,222,992.47 through its activities.
The National Law Review and China IP Law Update have described the sanction as believed to be the highest penalty ever imposed in China for unauthorized patent practice. The previous reported record was RMB 2.49 million, imposed in 2022 in a case involving a Zhejiang-based patent firm.
Branch operated without required license
According to the penalty decision, the Anhui branch of Beijing BoXTe Patent Agency was established on October 29, 2025, but did not obtain a patent agency practice license.
The regulator found that the branch conducted patent agency business by paying affiliation fees to use the qualifications of another party. The conduct generated illegal income of RMB 3,222,992.47.
The decision identifies the conduct as unauthorized patent agency business and cites Article 27 of China’s Patent Agency Regulations, under which unauthorized patent agency activity can result in an order to stop the illegal activity, confiscation of illegal income, and a fine of between one and five times the illegal income.
China’s Patent Agency Management Measures also specifically identify using another party’s qualifications through renting or borrowing as unauthorized patent agency practice.
Importantly, the RMB 17.08 million figure should not be described simply as a standalone fine. The published decision describes the amount as the total of the fine and confiscation. That distinction is significant when comparing the sanction with previous enforcement cases.
Record penalty follows earlier RMB 2.49 million sanction
The size of the Anhui penalty is particularly striking when compared with China’s previous reported record.
In June 2022, the National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) announced a RMB 2.49 million penalty against a Zhejiang-based patent firm for unauthorized patent agency practice and the filing of abnormal patent applications. At the time, CNIPA described the sanction as a record.
The new Anhui case is therefore more than six times larger in total monetary terms.
The difference is especially notable because the current case does not appear from the published decision to involve the abnormal patent application conduct that featured in the 2022 case. Instead, the Anhui decision centers on unauthorized patent agency business and the use of another party’s qualifications.
Part of China’s wider patent agency enforcement drive
The penalty comes against the backdrop of increasingly intensive regulation of China’s IP agency sector.
CNIPA has been pursuing its “Blue Sky” campaign, a long-running initiative aimed at strengthening supervision of the intellectual property agency industry and addressing serious violations.
CNIPA’s report on its 2025 rule-of-law work states that the agency imposed administrative penalties on 256 agencies and practitioners for serious violations during the year. It also says that licenses were revoked for 180 patent agencies and 1,208 branches, while the practice registrations of 8,755 patent agents were canceled.
The Anhui penalty therefore arrives at a time when Chinese authorities are already taking significant enforcement action against conduct within the patent agency profession.
The latest case demonstrates that the financial consequences can be substantial where regulators determine that patent agency services have been provided without the necessary authorization.
Implications for patent owners and service providers
The case is also relevant to companies using external IP service providers in China.
For patent owners, particularly international businesses managing Chinese portfolios, the decision underlines the importance of checking that the organizations and branches handling patent agency work have the necessary authorization.
The issue is particularly relevant where an organization operates through branches, affiliated entities or arrangements involving another agency’s qualifications. China’s regulatory framework expressly prohibits the use of another party’s qualifications to conduct patent agency business.
The penalty may therefore prompt companies to take a closer look at the regulatory status of their Chinese patent service providers and the entities through which their work is actually being performed.
A significant warning to China’s patent profession
Whether the RMB 17.08 million sanction ultimately proves to be the largest penalty ever imposed for unauthorized patent agency practice should remain qualified until a comprehensive official historical record is available.
Nevertheless, on the currently available evidence, it represents a dramatic increase on the previous reported record of RMB 2.49 million.
The case also illustrates the extent to which Chinese authorities are prepared to enforce licensing requirements within the patent agency sector.
For patent agencies and practitioners operating in China, the message is clear: unauthorized patent agency business, including the use of borrowed or rented qualifications, can result in exceptionally significant financial sanctions.
For international patent owners, the case provides an equally important compliance reminder: when appointing a Chinese IP service provider, verifying the provider’s regulatory status and the authorization of the entity actually performing patent agency work is becoming increasingly important.

Written by Elizabeth Jordan
Senior Industry Engagement Manager, CTC Legal Media
You may also like…
Dutch court blocks Merck’s injectable Keytruda in eight countries over Halozyme patent
The Hague District Court found that Merck’s subcutaneous cancer treatment infringes a patent covering modified...
El Salvador expands international IP framework as three WIPO treaties enter into force
El Salvador has expanded its participation in the international intellectual property system, with three...
UPC gives patent applicants another reason to think carefully about opt-outs
Patent applicants considering whether to opt their European patent applications out of the Unified Patent Court (UPC)...
Contact us to write for out Newsletter











