On 26 June 2026, the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress adopted the comprehensive revision of China's trade mark law. The amended law, comprising 87 articles across nine chapters, will come into force on 1 January 2027.
The reform reflects a clear policy shift towards discouraging trade mark stockpiling, promoting genuine use, strengthening regulatory oversight, and enhancing consumer and rights holder protection. Several of the amendments are likely to have a significant impact on trade mark portfolio management, enforcement strategies, and compliance practices.
1. Stronger Measures Against Bad-Faith Filings and Trade Mark Hoarding
The revised law expressly provides that trade mark applications filed without a genuine intention to use, and which clearly exceed the reasonable needs of normal business operations, shall be refused.
For the first time, direct administrative penalties may be imposed on applicants engaging in bad-faith filing activities. Where such conduct causes adverse effects, the applicant may be subject to a warning and a fine of up to RMB100,000 (US$14,710).
Trade mark agencies that knowingly assist bad-faith registrations may face fines of up to RMB200,000 (US$29,420).
These amendments reinforce the authorities' longstanding efforts to curb trade mark hoarding and abusive filing practices.
The amendments also introduce a formal complaint and reporting mechanism, allowing any organisation or individual to report the misleading use of registered trade marks and trade mark infringement activities to the competent authorities.
The introduction of a public reporting mechanism is a double-edged sword. On the one hand, it may help authorities identify and address genuinely problematic trade mark use and infringement activities that might otherwise go undetected. On the other hand, there is a risk that the mechanism could be used strategically by competitors or other interested parties to initiate complaints against brand owners. Businesses should therefore expect increased scrutiny and ensure that both their trade mark use and enforcement activities are well documented and compliant.
2. Expanded Protection for Prior Rights and Legitimate Interests
The revised law broadens protection from “prior rights” to “prior legitimate rights and interests” and expressly recognises earlier-filed trademark applications as a basis for refusing conflicting later applications.
These changes signal a broader approach to protecting interests arising before registration, although the scope of protected “legitimate interests” remains to be clarified through future practice.
3. Expanded Protection for Well-Known Trade Marks
The revised law removes the previous requirement that only registered well-known trade marks may benefit from cross-class protection. Unregistered well-known trade marks may now also enjoy anti-dilution protection in appropriate circumstances.
The amendments further introduce a cross-border well-known trade mark confirmation mechanism. Where a trade mark owner becomes involved in overseas trade mark squatting disputes or infringement proceedings, it may apply to the Chinese trade mark authorities for official confirmation of its mark's well-known status for use in foreign proceedings.
The revised law also expressly confirms that well-known status may be recognised in unfair competition cases. Although such recognition has already occurred in practice, the amendment formally codifies the position and provides greater legal certainty for rights holders.
4. Ex Officio Cancellation of Unused Trade Marks
In addition to the existing non-use cancellation mechanism initiated by third parties, the trade mark authorities will now be empowered to cancel registered trade marks on their own initiative where:
This change may increase scrutiny of defensive registrations and large portfolios containing trade marks that are not supported by genuine commercial use.
5. Opposition Period Reduced to Two Months
The opposition period following the publication of a preliminarily approved trade mark application will be shortened from three months to two months.
Rights holders should review their trade mark watching procedures and internal decision-making processes to ensure that potentially conflicting applications can be identified and challenged within the shorter timeframe.
6. Suspension Mechanisms Introduced for Opposition, Refusal Appeal, Opposition Appeal[1] and Invalidation Proceedings
The revised law formally introduces suspension mechanisms for opposition, refusal appeal, opposition appeal, and invalidation proceedings where the outcome of the case depends on the resolution of a related matter.
The new provisions are intended to reduce the need for parallel proceedings and repeated filings, particularly in cases involving prior rights, ownership disputes or the status of cited registrations.
By allowing proceedings to be suspended pending the outcome of related cases, the amendments may improve procedural efficiency and help ensure more consistent decisions.
This change is expected to be particularly beneficial in complex trade mark disputes, where the outcome of one proceeding is often contingent upon the resolution of another.
7. Strengthened Regulation of Trade Mark Licensing
The revised law strengthens quality-control obligations in trade mark licensing arrangements. While licensors remain responsible for supervising the quality of goods or services offered under the licensed trademark, the new law expressly provides that a licensor may terminate a trade mark licence where the licensee fails to fulfil its quality-assurance obligations.
This amendment reinforces the importance of effective quality control and provides trade mark owners with clearer statutory grounds to address non-compliant licensees.
8. Increased Accountability for Trade Mark Examiners and Enforcement Officials
The revised law introduces more detailed accountability provisions for officials engaged in trade mark examination, administration and enforcement activities. This development is generally welcome, as it aims to promote consistency, transparency and integrity in decision-making.
However, given the inherently subjective nature of certain examination grounds, particularly refusals based on the deceptive marks provision under Article 10, it remains to be seen how these accountability measures will be implemented in practice. As examiners may adopt a more cautious approach to avoid regulatory scrutiny, brand owners should be prepared for the possibility of more conservative examination standards and a higher refusal rate. For important marks, rights holders may therefore need to factor in additional time and budget for review and appeal proceedings.
9. Enhanced Enforcement Against Misleading Trade Mark Use
The revised law introduces stronger measures against the use of trade marks in a manner that misleads consumers.
This includes trade mark use that conveys unsupported claims regarding a product's characteristics, ingredients, manufacturing methods, performance, or quality. Authorities may order corrective action, impose administrative penalties and, in serious cases, cancel the relevant trade mark registration.
The amendments also introduce a formal complaint and reporting mechanism, allowing any organisation or individual to report such conduct to the competent authorities.
10. Motion Marks Recognised as Registrable Trade Marks
The revised law expressly recognises motion marks as a registrable category of trade mark.
Examples include animated logos, start-up animations and other moving brand identifiers that increasingly form part of modern brand strategies. The amendment reflects the growing importance of digital assets in sectors such as e-commerce, online entertainment, software and social media.
11. Online Use Expressly Recognised as Trade Mark Use
For the first time, the law expressly confirms that use of a trade mark through the internet and information networks constitutes statutory trade mark use.
Evidence generated through e-commerce platforms, social media channels, online advertising and livestreaming activities may therefore be relied upon as evidence of use, including in response to non-use cancellation proceedings.
The amendment provides greater certainty regarding the evidentiary value of digital commercial activities.
12. Liability for Malicious Trade Mark Litigation
The revised law targets abusive trade mark litigation by providing that courts may sanction parties who initiate trade mark proceedings through malicious collusion, fabrication of material facts or other bad-faith conduct.
Where losses are caused to another party, the offending party may also be held civilly liable for damages.
The new provision is intended to deter opportunistic enforcement actions and other forms of abusive trade mark litigation.
13. Stricter Regulation of Collective and Certification Marks
The revised law introduces additional regulatory requirements for collective and certification marks, including penalties for misuse and unjustified restrictions on eligible users. It also requires assignees of such marks to possess the necessary qualifications and supervisory capabilities.
These amendments reflect the authorities' increased focus on the proper administration and public, interest functions of collective and certification marks.
14. Stricter Regulation of Collective and Certification Marks
The revised law clarifies that, where non-use is raised as a defence in trade mark infringement proceedings, the relevant period for assessing use is the three years preceding the alleged infringement.
While the previous law also referred to a three-year period, the amendment provides certainty by expressly defining the relevant timeframe.
15. Stricter Regulation of Collective and Certification Marks
The revised law introduces direct regulatory obligations and penalties for both trademark agencies and trademark practitioners. It also formalises requirements relating to professional conduct, conflict management and industry self-regulation.
These amendments reflect the authorities' continued efforts to strengthen oversight of the trade mark agency profession. By imposing stricter regulatory requirements on both agencies and individual practitioners, the reforms are expected to further curb bad-faith filings and trade mark hoarding, while promoting a healthier trade mark ecosystem.
Practical Considerations
In light of the forthcoming changes, businesses should consider taking the following steps:
Looking Ahead
The 2026 amendments represent the most significant reform of China's trade mark system in more than four decades. While further implementing regulations and administrative guidance are expected before the legislation comes into force on 1 January 2027, businesses should begin reviewing their trade mark strategies and compliance practices now to ensure readiness for the new regime.
[1] It means the appeal against opposition decision (for applicants only) .
