China’s New Trademark Law: Key Changes for Foreign Businesses

In short: China’s legislature passed the revised Trademark Law on 26 June 2026. It takes effect on 1 January 2027 — the first comprehensive revision since 1983. Three changes touch foreign brand owners immediately. You can now oppose a squatter’s application at an earlier stage; the squatter also risks a fine of up to RMB 100,000. The window to oppose a published mark drops from three months to two. And the authorities can now cancel a registration you never use — on their own initiative. The weeks before 1 January are your window to audit the portfolio and assemble use evidence. The checklist in the second half of this article sets out what to do, in order.

What changed, and why officials call it a shift to “use”

The revised law grows from 8 chapters and 73 articles to 9 chapters and 87 articles. It adds a dedicated chapter on the conditions for registration, tightens the rules on using registered marks, and strengthens enforcement. Official commentary sums up the direction as a move from “emphasising registration over use” to treating registration and use as equally important. That matters in a register holding nearly 49.9 million valid domestic marks at the end of 2025.

For foreign companies, the practical consequences concentrate in five areas.

1. Bad-faith applications now face earlier opposition — and fines

Bad-faith squatting is the most common problem foreign brand owners face in China. A local applicant files your brand first, then uses the pending registration against you. It can block your customs recordal, open an e-commerce store under your name, or demand payment. The revised law attacks this at three points:

The three pressure points

• Rejection at source (Article 19). The authorities will not register an application “not made for the purpose of use, and clearly beyond what normal business operations require”. They also prohibit applications made by deception or other improper means outright.
• A new ground of opposition (Article 36). Under the current law, you could only raise “deception or other improper means” after registration, in an invalidation action — slower and costlier. From January, any person can raise it during the opposition period, at the examination stage.
• Administrative fines (Articles 54, 67–68). Bad-faith filing that causes adverse effects now draws a warning and a fine of up to RMB 100,000. Agencies that knowingly accept such filings face up to RMB 200,000 for the firm, and RMB 100,000 for the individual practitioner. All agencies must also file their personnel details with the trade mark authorities.

Two limits that protect brand owners

First, the draft Examination Guidelines exclude defensive filings from the bad-faith definition. Registering marks identical or similar to your own remains lawful. So does a reasonable number of advance filings for business you realistically plan to launch. Second, the guidelines require both conditions before they treat an application as bad faith. The applicant must lack any purpose of use, and file clearly out of proportion to its business. If you plan filings for a China entry, document the business plan alongside them. For the registration sequence itself, see our guide to the trademark registration procedure in China.

2. The opposition window shrinks from three months to two

Article 36 shortens the opposition period after publication of a provisional approval from three months to two. The stated aim is faster registration and fewer obstructive oppositions. The effect on rights holders is symmetrical: your window to oppose a squatter’s mark also shrinks by a third.

The draft transitional rules set the dividing line by publication date. Marks whose preliminary approval gazette appeared before 1 January 2027 follow the old three-month rule. Gazettes published on or after that date follow the two-month rule. For international registrations, the reference date is the WIPO gazette date. In practice: rebuild your watch-service response times around a two-month clock, and pre-assemble evidence files instead of collecting them after an alert arrives.

3. The authorities can now cancel unused marks without a request

Under the current law, you can only attack a mark after three years of non-use. And you can only do it by filing a request. Article 57 lets the trade mark authorities cancel such marks — and generic-name marks — ex officio. The draft transitional rules confirm the power reaches marks registered before 2027. Local departments investigate and report upward; the holder then receives a notice to submit evidence before any decision.

Two implications for foreign businesses:

• Your dormant registrations are now a liability. Overseas brand owners often register widely across classes, “just in case”. Without genuine use, those portfolios now face real cancellation risk. Your evidence should carry dates, match real transactions and stand up commercially: invoices, e-commerce records, advertising and exhibition materials, customs filings.
• Online use now counts, expressly. Article 2 brings use “through information networks such as the internet” within the statutory definition. E-commerce listings, livestream selling and short-video promotion count on the same footing as offline use. For most foreign brands, this is the easiest evidence to generate deliberately.

4. Misleading use of your own registered mark now carries fines

Article 56 targets what Chinese commentary calls “心机商标”. These registered marks mislead the public about quality, workmanship, materials or origin. The sanction ladder has three rungs. First, an order to rectify within a time limit. Second, a fine of up to five times the illegal business revenue where that revenue reaches RMB 50,000 — or up to RMB 250,000 otherwise. Third, cancellation of the registration itself if the misuse continues. Anyone may report such use to the authorities (Article 70). Under the draft transitional rules, the provision even reaches misleading use that continues into 2027 from an older registration.

The revision also upgraded the enforcement tools around infringement. Administrative authorities must transfer suspected criminal cases to the police. They can now inspect business documents and preserve evidence in urgent situations (Articles 75–76).

For foreign brands, the exposure lies less in the mark itself than in the marketing around it. Packaging claims, advertising copy and product naming can imply a quality, ingredient or origin the product cannot support. If your China-facing materials lean on implied provenance, review them before January.

5. Enforcement gets sharper for right holders — and costlier for infringers

Money: damages, costs and repeat offenders

• Punitive damages, on an easier trigger. The one-to-five-times multiplier continues. But Article 77 lowers the subjective threshold from “bad faith” (恶意) to “willful” (故意). This aligns the statute with the Civil Code and the Supreme People’s Court’s 2026 interpretation. In litigation terms: one less thing to prove.
• Parallel routes to the damages base. The claimant can now choose between actual losses and the infringer’s profits as the primary measure. Previously losses had priority, and profits served only as a fallback. The royalty multiple remains the third route.
• Enforcement costs sit outside the multiplier. The award expressly includes attorney fees, notarisation and investigation costs. The law counts them outside the punitive base, so the multiplier no longer dilutes them.
• Repeat infringement aggravates liability (Article 74). Two or more infringements within five years attract heavier penalties.

Tools: well-known marks, fair use, dynamic marks

• Malicious litigation sanctioned (Article 81). Courts can punish suits built on collusion or fabricated facts, and the target gains a damages claim — a response to “trademark troll” litigation.
• Well-known mark protection extended (Articles 63, 69). Cross-class protection now covers well-known marks even without a Chinese registration. One provision targets cross-border brand owners directly. If a foreign proceeding needs proof that your mark is well known in China, you may now ask the Chinese authorities to confirm it. You submit the request through local trade mark administration departments; CNIPA decides.
• Fair use codified (Article 73). Indicative use means truthfully stating what a product does, what it fits, or where it comes from. That falls outside the register holder’s control, unless it confuses. Relevant to spare parts, repair services and compatibility claims.
• Dynamic marks registrable. You can file motion logos from January. The draft rules require a short MP4 video plus three to nine static frames, and evidence of acquired distinctiveness on request.

What has not changed — and one circulating claim to ignore

Secondary summaries describe the RMB 5 million statutory damages cap and the one-to-five-times multiplier as new. They are not. The 2019 amendment introduced both: it raised the cap from RMB 3 million, and the multiplier from one-to-three. This revision changes the trigger (“willful” instead of “bad faith”), the parallel damage routes and the treatment of costs. The numbers themselves carry over.

Also worth restating: the register remains open to defensive filings, and the draft guidelines say so explicitly. The law targets volume filing without any purpose of use — not a brand owner protecting the perimeter of its own marks.

Which rules apply to cases that straddle 1 January 2027

The transitional measures published in draft on 28 September 2026 closed for comments on 12 November 2026. They follow the standard formula — substantive issues under the old law, procedure under the new — with cut-off rules worth knowing:

• Opposition periods follow the gazette date (domestic) or the WIPO gazette date (international): before 1 January, three months; on or after, two.
• Applications filed in 2026 but decided in 2027 — registration, opposition, review, renewal, transfer and similar — follow the new law procedurally.
• Invalidation of pre-2027 registrations: procedure under the new law; substance under the law in force at registration.
• Ex officio non-use cancellations can reach pre-2027 registrations, through the local-investigation route described above.
• Misleading use continuing into 2027 falls under the new law, even for older registrations.

These are draft texts and may change before adoption. But the direction of each rule has held steady since the law passed.

Frequently asked questions

When does China’s new Trademark Law take effect?

China’s legislature passed it on 26 June 2026; it takes effect on 1 January 2027. The date divides the procedures. Applications and gazettes dated before 1 January generally follow the old rules; later ones follow the new. Substance and procedure differ.

Which opposition period applies to my case — three months or two?

The publication date of the preliminary approval gazette decides (for international registrations, the WIPO gazette date). Before 1 January 2027: three months. On or after: two months.

Are defensive trademark filings still allowed?

Yes. The draft Examination Guidelines expressly exclude filings identical or similar to your own marks, and reasonable advance filings for planned business. What fails is filing without any purpose of use and clearly beyond normal business needs — both conditions must apply.

Can the authorities cancel my unused defensive registration?

From 1 January 2027, yes: they may cancel three-year non-use marks on their own initiative, even registrations from before 2027. The process starts with a local investigation and ends with an evidence notice. Build a dated use-evidence file now. Consider narrowing a wide defensive portfolio to classes you can plausibly use.

Do the new fines apply to foreign companies?

Yes — the law governs trademark activities within China, including use of registered marks in the Chinese market. Foreign brand owners usually act through Chinese agencies, and the revision tightens agency rules too, with fines for agencies that knowingly accept bad-faith filings.

What is the single most urgent step?

Assemble use evidence for the marks you actively use, and check gazette dates on any squatter’s mark you plan to oppose. Both get harder — in opposite ways — after 1 January 2027.

If you are weighing a filing, an opposition or a portfolio clean-up against this timetable, our team advises on IP protection in China for foreign brand owners — including oppositions, invalidations and evidence of use. The action checklist below sets out what to do in what order.