Removing Advertisements: Analysis Based on the Advertising Guidelines (Draft for Comment)

I. Introduction

Since 2024, the regulatory authorities have significantly strengthened their enforcement efforts on the content of advertising citations. Particularly in industries such as infant formula milk powder, electric vehicles, and restaurant chains, cases involving illegal advertisements citing the "Market Position Confirmation Certificates" issued by third-party market research institutions have been on the rise. Against this backdrop, the State Administration for Market Regulation recently released the "Admission Draft of the Enforcement Guidelines for Advertising Citation Content" (hereinafter referred to as the "Enforcement Guidelines"), aiming to provide clear enforcement guidelines for grassroots law enforcement departments and delineate compliance red lines for advertisers, advertising operators, and advertising publishers. This article will conduct a brief analysis of the Enforcement Guidelines from a legal perspective, based on recent typical administrative penalty cases, with the aim of providing reference for enterprises' advertising compliance work.

By reviewing nearly thirty administrative penalty cases involving advertising citation content in the case database of Sha Wen [1], it can be observed that the following situations exist in current practice: First, advertisers fail to indicate the source when citing third-party research data; second, the cited content deviates from the original proof documents, such as expanding "electric two-wheel vehicles" to "electric vehicles"; third, there is a lack of clear indication of the scope and validity period of the cited content; fourth, some cases involve the competition between absolute language and the content of the citation. These issues have all been specifically addressed in this Enforcement Guidelines, demonstrating the regulatory authorities' profound insight into practical problems. However, it should be noted that this guideline is currently in the "soliciting opinions" stage and its legal effect has not yet officially taken effect. Before the final version is released, there is still the possibility of minor adjustments to the details based on industry feedback. Therefore, our current interpretation and assessment are more for the "preparation" of upcoming compliance upgrades. Before the final version is released, enterprises should keep up with the policy trend to conduct self-inspections in advance and maintain dynamic attention, waiting for the final draft as the ultimate standard for law enforcement and compliance.

II. Practical Interpretation and Case Confirmation of Core Clauses

(1) Definition and Boundaries of Cited Content

Article 2 of the Enforcement Guidelines defines the cited content in advertising as "data, statistics, survey results, abstracts, quotations, etc. that are referenced from a third party and are related to the goods or services being promoted."

This definition clarifies the two core elements of cited content: third-party origin and relevance to the goods. From case practice, the "Market Position Confirmation Certificate" issued by market research companies is currently the most common carrier of cited content, and the expressions involved include "top sales," "leading sales," "industry leading," "top market position," etc. In the case of Linquan County Yangqiao Mommy Knows Baby Products Store [2], the party's advertisement used the expression "FH has been the top milk powder for five consecutive years," which originated from the confirmation made by Sha Mouwen based on the retail sales ranking of Chinese infant formula milk powder from 2019 to 2023, fully complying with the definition of cited content in the Enforcement Guidelines.

It is worth noting:

Article 17 of the Enforcement Guidelines also introduces the concept of "self-proven content," that is, data obtained by the advertiser through their own experiments, measurements, statistics, surveys, etc. Self-proven content does not necessarily need to indicate the source, but still needs to comply with the requirements of Articles 9 to 13.

This regulation effectively distinguishes the different compliance standards between third-party cited content and enterprise self-proven content, reflecting the regulatory refinement thinking. Particularly noteworthy is that Article 17, Paragraph 3, clearly stipulates that data, materials, and conclusions generated by artificial intelligence or deep synthesis methods should be recognized as self-proven content. This forward-looking draft provides a law enforcement reference basis for advertising regulation in the era of artificial intelligence.

(2) Detailed Requirements for the Obligation to Indicate Source

Article 8 of the Enforcement Guidelines provides a detailed explanation of the "indicating source" obligation stipulated in Article 11, Paragraph 2 of the Advertising Law [3], clearly stating that the source should include the names of the institutions conducting experiments, measurements, inspections, statistics, and surveys, as well as the titles and author information of the literature materials. From the case database, not indicating the source is the most common violation. Taking the series of cases punished by the Market Supervision Bureau of Linquan County for the mother-and-baby stores as an example, the Mother Love Time Pregnancy and Infant Children Life Shop [4], the Xiangjiajia Love Mother-and-Baby Life Shop [5], and the Wang Chunxia Mother-and-Baby Products Store [6] in Linquan County, among others, were all punished for publishing advertisements containing content such as "XX has been the top milk powder for five consecutive years" and "The sales volume of sheep milk powder ranks first," but did not indicate the source. These cases present a highly similar pattern of violations: although the party held the "Market Position Confirmation Certificate" issued by Sha Mouwen, they failed to mark the key information such as the institution name, research time, and applicable scope in the actual advertisement release.

Article 8, Paragraphs 3 and 4 of the Enforcement Guidelines further specify the requirements for indicating the source in special circumstances: for citations from periodicals, the name of the periodical, issue number, and page number should be indicated; for citations from internet web pages, the acquisition or access path should be indicated, and the advertisement content should be adjusted when the network content or path changes.

These regulations impose higher compliance requirements on academic citation-type advertisements and network data citation-type advertisements.

(3) Explicit Requirements for Scope of Application and Validity Period

Article 9 of the Enforcement Guidelines is one of the highlights of this legislation, systematically stipulating the requirements for indicating the scope of application and validity period of cited content.

This article lists four types of situations that should be explicitly indicated: statistical data or survey results are only applicable to a specific region, industry, or period; experimental conclusions can only be reproduced under laboratory conditions or specific conditions; inspection and testing data are only valid for the sample; and other situations that require explicit indication.

This regulation directly addresses the widespread problem of "generalizing from partial information" in practice. Taking the case of Jingxian Hongwei Auto Shop as a typical example [7], the advertisement content released by the party involved was "Yade electric vehicles have been the world's top-selling brand for seven consecutive years". However, according to the certificate issued by Sha Wen, the research proved that the object of the investigation was actually "Yade electric two-wheelers" rather than the broad concept of "electric vehicles". The party simplified "electric two-wheelers" to "electric vehicles", which led to a substantial change in the applicable scope of the cited content, constituting an illegal act of inaccurate citation.

The case of the distributor of Kaidisi door locks in Dalian Bay, Huizhou, further confirmed the importance of clearly indicating the scope of application [8]. In this case, the party released an advertisement using the statement "Double Eleven, the highest sales volume in the entire network is the first". However, after investigation and verification, the sales data cited only covered some e-commerce platforms such as Tmall and JD, and the statement of "entire network" lacked comprehensive data support, constituting an illegal fact of inaccurate application scope of the cited content. In addition, the statements used in the advertisement such as "Kaidisi is globally leading", "sales are globally leading", "711 patents and global leading technology", "popular in 36 countries" were supported by the proof materials issued by Sha Wen, but none of them were indicated in the advertisement as the source, and ultimately were determined to be illegal. This case demonstrated that even if the advertiser has a third-party certification certificate, it still needs to use strictly in accordance with the limited conditions stated in the certificate and cannot arbitrarily expand or simplify the expression scope.

(4) Criteria for Identifying False Advertising and Misleading Advertising

Article 14 and Article 15 of the "Law Enforcement Guidelines" have constructed a system for identifying false or misleading advertising citations.

Article 14 lists five types of circumstances that should be identified as false or misleading: using fabricated, forged or unverifiable content; unable to explain the source of the cited content or the relevant content cannot be queried; through tampering, partial citation, etc., exaggerating favorable content or concealing unfavorable content; explicitly or implicitly stating that the product has functions that do not match the actual situation; and other false or misleading circumstances. Article 15 stipulates six types of circumstances as important considerations for false or misleading, including inconsistency between the cited content and the generally recognized views in the industry, failure to clearly indicate the re-creation conditions, failure to clearly indicate the validity of the sample, failure to clearly indicate the scope of application and validity period, and not meeting the requirements of Article 4 and Article 5.

The case of Shanghai Hefu Lao Mian Restaurant is a typical case of applying the false advertising provisions [9]. The party used the statement "The first brand of Chinese-style noodle restaurants" in the advertisement, violating Article 9, Paragraph 3 of the "Advertising Law", which prohibits the use of absolute terms such as "the highest level" and "the best". It is worth noting that the direct subsidiary company of the party, Shanghai Hefu Catering Management Co., Ltd. Baoshan Second Branch, had previously been investigated and punished by the Baoshan District Market Supervision Bureau of Shanghai for providing padded meal papers with the content "TOP1. The first brand of Chinese-style noodle restaurants" to consumers, so this illegal act was not a first-time violation and was ultimately fined 30,000 yuan. The case of Huai'an Xiangshan Hu Ya Catering Store reveals another illegal pattern [10]: The party used statements such as "The national sales volume is the highest" in the promotional leaflet. Although the party held the "Market Position Confirmation Certificate" issued by Sha Wen, the investigation data was for the year 2022, and the party was still using this promotional slogan during the inspection in 2024, the data timeliness is questionable, and ultimately was determined to be false or misleading commercial promotion.

(5) Regulation of Absolute Terms in Specific Fields

Article 13 of the "Law Enforcement Guidelines" is an important supplement to the "Advertising Absolute Terms Enforcement Guidelines", clarifying the restrictions on the use of terms such as "best" and "first" in specific industries, fields or regions. According to this regulation, if the relevant industry or field is smaller than the national standard or industry standard classification for the economy, or the relevant region is smaller than the provincial administrative region, and it may cause consumers to misunderstand the market position of the business entity, it does not fall under the exemption circumstances stipulated in Item 6 of Article 6 of the "Law Enforcement Guidelines for Absolute Language in Advertising". This regulation effectively curbs the common phenomenon of "artificial rankings" in practice, where enterprises obtain the title of "first" by infinitely subdividing industry fields.

The case of Jiangsu Fukuqing Home Furnishing Co., Ltd. [11] illustrates the application logic of this clause. The advertisement released by the party contained the content "export sales volume first", although it falls under the exemption circumstances stipulated in Item 6 of Article 6 of the "Law Enforcement Guidelines for Absolute Language in Advertising", that is, "describing the objective situation of time and space sequence or promoting product sales volume, sales amount, market share, etc. of facts under the condition of limited specific time, region, etc.", but the party was unable to prove its authenticity.

According to Article 7 of the "Law Enforcement Guidelines for Absolute Language in Advertising", "if the absolute language in an advertisement falls under the circumstances stipulated in Article 5 and Article 6 of this guideline, but the advertiser is unable to prove its authenticity, it shall be dealt with in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Advertising Law".

Finally, it was determined to be illegal and fined 30,000 yuan. The case of Fujian Haixinyuan Food Development Co., Ltd. [12] also involves the issue of absolute language. The party released the advertisement "Haixinyuan abalone meat has the highest sales volume nationwide" on product packaging, shopping bags, and large advertising boards, holding the "Market Position Confirmation Certificate" issued by Sha Mouwen, and was determined to violate Article 9, Item 3 of the "Advertising Law", and was fined 20,000 yuan.

III. Review Obligations of Advertising Operators and Advertisers

Article 18 and Article 19 of the Enforcement Guidelines clearly define the review obligations of advertising operators and advertisers.

Article 18 stipulates that if one accepts the commission of others to conduct experiments, measurements, statistics, investigations, etc., and is aware or should be aware that the data and conclusions generated are used for advertising content, it shall be deemed as participating in the design and production activities of advertisements, which falls under the category of advertising operators as stipulated in Article 2, Paragraph 3 of the Advertising Law.

This provision incorporates third-party research institutions into the advertising regulatory system, which is of great significance in curbing the "pay-for-ranking" (buying rankings)乱象. Article 19 further clarifies that if the cited content of an advertisement has no source， fails to clearly indicate the scope of application and validity period， or is inconsistent with the original materials， advertising operators and advertisers shall not provide advertising services in accordance with the law， and their obligations have been raised.

In addition， it is necessary to note that the issue of the identification of the advertiser. The Ningde Fanren Tongxin Trading Co.， Ltd. case demonstrated the complexity of the identification of the advertiser [13]. In this case， the party， as the Ningde distributor of "Youbo Keping Shu" milk powder， downloaded the promotional advertisement content from the company's WeChat group (Fujian Keping Shu business communication group)， and adopted the advertising billboard promotion mode to release advertisements such as "The first Chinese cesarean section milk powder & Leading sales". Although the involved advertisement content originated from the template provided by the brand headquarters， the party， as the actual advertiser， was still identified as the advertiser and was held accountable for the corresponding legal responsibilities. This case indicates that distributors cannot use the fact that the advertisement content was provided by the brand as an excuse to exempt their review obligations. Before releasing the advertisement， they should verify whether the cited content meets the legal requirements.

IV. Practical Considerations for Penalty Discretion

Article 21 of the Enforcement Guidelines makes principled provisions on the exercise of penalty discretion， requiring the market supervision departments to make decisions based on the Advertising Law and other laws and regulations， combined with the content of the advertisement， the facts， nature， circumstances， social harm degree， and the subjective fault of the party. For cases with minor illegal circumstances， short advertisement duration， few viewers， and timely correction without causing harm consequences， legal penalties shall not be imposed； for first-time violations with minor harm consequences and timely correction， legal penalties may be waived. From the analysis of case databases， cases that do not impose penalties or impose lenient penalties usually have the following common characteristics： the party is an individual business owner or a small and micro enterprise； the advertising cost is low， usually below 1，000 yuan； the duration is short； no actual harm consequences have been caused； after the case was discovered， the party cooperated with the investigation and actively corrected.

In contrast， the W Long Magic Root Food false advertising case investigated by Linchuan District Market Supervision Bureau presented such a discretionary result [14]： The party did not correct after being ordered to do so and only accepted the inquiry after multiple inquiries were issued， although it was a first-time violation， but considering the fact of refusing to correct， the final penalty was a 200，000 yuan fine.

V. Compliance Suggestions for Enterprises on Advertising

Based on the above case analysis and the provisions of the Enforcement Guidelines， this article proposes the following compliance suggestions for the legal departments of enterprises. Firstly， in the stage of obtaining the cited content， enterprises should try to choose third-party institutions with official recognition to issue proof materials， and pay attention to whether the research methods， sample scope， and data sources of the institutions meet the requirements of scientificity and representativeness. For the "Market Position Confirmation Certificate" issued by Shasha Wen et al. market research institutions， the party should fully retain the business license of the research institution， the research qualification， the original certificate or the research report， and clearly specify the applicable conditions and validity period stated in the certificate. Secondly， in the advertising release stage， one should strictly use the cited content as stated in the certificate， and not arbitrarily simplify， expand or modify the original expression. In advertisements, the source of the cited content should be fully indicated, including the name of the institution, the research time, the applicable scope, and other key information. For the applicable scope and validity period of the cited content, they should be marked in a way that consumers can clearly identify, avoiding using too small font sizes or text that is similar to the background color.

Furthermore, enterprises should establish an internal review mechanism for advertisement releases. The legal affairs department should participate in the compliance review of advertisement content, focusing on the authenticity, accuracy, and legality of the cited content. Do not artificially fabricate scientific research papers or data for the "core claim". For advertisements released by distributors or franchisees, the brand should provide standardized advertisement templates and conduct compliance training, clearly prohibiting any arbitrary modification of the expression of the cited content. In addition, enterprises should regularly check the timeliness of in-use advertisements. For cited content that exceeds the validity period, it should be updated or removed in a timely manner.

Conclusion

The release of the "Ad Guidance on Cited Content Enforcement (Draft for Soliciting Opinions)" helps China's advertising supervision enter a more refined and standardized new stage. This guideline summarizes the practical experience of law enforcement and comprehensively refines the application of Article 11 of the Advertising Law. It provides clear operational guidelines and also sets clear compliance boundaries for market entities. For enterprises, advertising compliance is not only a legal obligation but also an important manifestation of business integrity and brand reputation. In the era of highly convenient information dissemination on new media, an illegal advertisement may reach a large number of consumers in a short period of time, causing irreparable reputational losses. Therefore, the legal affairs department of enterprises should attach great importance to advertising compliance work, increase advertising compliance budgets and personnel allocation, and internalize the requirements of the enforcement guidelines into daily management systems, preventing advertising illegal risks from the source. At the same time, enterprises should also pay attention to the final content of the enforcement guideline and promptly adjust compliance strategies to ensure that advertising behaviors always comply with the latest requirements of laws and regulations. We look forward to further clarification of several controversial issues in the final version of the guideline, providing more clear compliance guidance for market entities.

Footnote:

[1]. [IMA Knowledge Base] Cases related to Sha Wen.

[2]. Refer to the Administrative Penalty Decision Document of Linquan County Market Supervision and Administration Bureau, No. 830 of 2024, Lin City Market Supervision and Administration Penalty [2024].

[3]. Article 12, Paragraph 2 of the Advertising Law: "When using data, statistics, survey results, quotations, etc. as cited content in advertisements, they must be true and accurate, and the source must be indicated. If the cited content has an applicable scope and validity period, it must be clearly indicated."

[4]. Refer to the Administrative Penalty Decision Document of Linquan County Market Supervision and Administration Bureau, No. 1473 of 2024, Lin City Market Supervision and Administration Penalty [2024].

[5]. Refer to the Administrative Penalty Decision Document of Linquan County Market Supervision and Administration Bureau, No. 1360 of 2024, Lin City Market Supervision and Administration Penalty [2024].

[6]. Refer to the Administrative Penalty Decision Document of Linquan County Market Supervision and Administration Bureau, No. 1432 of 2024, Lin City Market Supervision and Administration Penalty [2024].

[7]. Refer to the Administrative Penalty Decision Document of Jingxian County Market Supervision and Administration Bureau, No. Jing City Supervision (Cai) No Penalty [2024], No. 7047 of 2024.

[8]. Refer to the Administrative Penalty Decision Document of the Market Supervision and Administration Bureau of Huizhou Dabaiwan Development Zone Management Committee, No. Huaiwan City Supervision West No Penalty [2025], No. 30 of 2025.

[9]. Refer to the Administrative Penalty Decision Document of Shanghai Pudong District Market Supervision and Administration Bureau, No. Huo Shijian Pu Chu [2025], No. 152025000135.

[10]. Refer to the Administrative Penalty Decision Document of Huaibei City Xiangshan District Market Supervision and Administration Bureau, No. Xiang City Supervision Penalty Notice [2024], No. 44, the certificate content is "Data is based on the sales volume of the fried chicken restaurant in 2022; Fried chicken is a dish name originated from the Central Plains region (excluding dishes such as large plate fried chicken and spicy chicken); The fried chicken restaurant refers to a restaurant with a brand positioning of fried chicken exclusive, excluding fried chicken brands mainly engaged in takeout business; The survey was completed in July 2023."

[11]. Refer to the Administrative Penalty Decision Document of Peixian County Market Supervision and Administration Bureau, No. Peixi Supervision Penalty Notice [2024], No. 00693.

[12]. Refer to the Administrative Penalty Decision Document of Lianjiang County Market Supervision and Administration Bureau, No. Lian City Supervision Penalty Notice [2024], No. Pu B3.

[13]. Refer to the Administrative Penalty Decision Document of Ningde City Market Supervision and Administration Bureau, No. Ning City Supervision Penalty [2025], No. 152.

[14]. Refer to the Administrative Penalty Decision Document of Linchuan District Market Supervision and Administration Bureau, No. Lin City Supervision Penalty [2025], No. 74.