A side company that sells to the employer is a conflict file — a policy PDF does not cure an undisclosed related vendor.
Conflicts sit at the junction of Company Law (director/shareholder related-party rules), labour/handbook duties, and AUCL if the conflict is a kickback in disguise. Typical facts: employee’s spouse owns the vendor, a manager’s side WFOE invoices the employer, or a tender scored by someone who takes a cut. Disclosure, recusal and vendor DD are the controls. This page is the COI overlay. Third-party DD and fraud investigations are how you run the file. Shareholder-related-party company-law detail stays on formation pages.
4 questions before you choose the route.
This page identifies the right question and evidence. It does not determine the legal outcome on a reader’s facts.
Who is related to whom?
Family, side company, director.
MapWas it disclosed and recused?
Handbook vs silence.
DiscloseIs there a kickback on top?
Bribery overlay.
KickbackVendor still needed?
DD or exit.
VendorWorking rule: Map the regulated role before marketing or launch in China.
The signal ledger.
These facts move the question beyond a label and into a product, money-flow and control analysis.
Bring a compact evidence docket—not a pitch deck.
Give a compliance team or counsel the operating facts that reveal the perimeter.
Questions people ask before they build.
Short answers for orientation. The right result can change with the service model and current rules.
Is a family vendor automatically illegal?
Undisclosed and unmanaged is the problem. Some groups allow it with recusal and pricing evidence.
Is this bribery?
If money flows back to the employee, yes it may be. Open the bribery pages.
Primary authorities
Reviewed sources support orientation, not a fact-specific assessment.